Allowed

Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Paran Jyoti Saikia and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Aug 2024I.A.(Civil)/1352/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an interlocutory application for condonation of delay in filing a connected writ appeal, accepting the reasons provided by the applicant and waiving service on pro forma respondents.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 35 days delay in filing connected writ appeal; direction to register and list the appeal.

Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 2… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010090082024

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1352/2024 In WA No.13569/2023 (Filing Number)

¶5

1.ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. AND 2 ORS. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTAN BAZAR, GUWAHATI 781001, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM AND

¶6

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,

¶7

2: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI 781001 DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶8

3: THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

¶9

ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI 781001 DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

1.PARAN JYOTI SAIKIA AND 2 ORS. S/O SRI DHARMA SAIKIA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 17, LUTUMA PO BINOVANAGAR, PS FATASIL AMBARI, GUWAHATI 781018 DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶12

2:THE ALLAHABAD BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER ZONAL OFFICE GS ROAD OPP. BORA SERVICE STATION ULUBARI GUWAHATI 781007

¶13

3:THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER

¶14

ZONAL OFFICEALLAHABAD BANK, GS ROAD OPP. BORA SERVICE STATION, ULUBARI GUWAHATI 78100

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

For the Applicant(s) : Mr. N. Deka, Advocate.

¶17

: Mr. M. Gogoi, Advocate.

¶18

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Kalita, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶19

– BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶20

02.08.2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

¶21

As per office note, notice upon the respondent Nos.2 and 3 has not been served. It is noticed that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are proforma respondents and the contesting respondent i.e. respondent No.1 is represented through learned counsel Mr. K. Kalita. Hence, service of notice upon the respondent Nos.2 and 3 is waived.

¶22

The instant Interlocutory Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to condone the delay of 35 days occasioned in filing the connected writ appeal.

¶23

Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel appearing for the applicants has submitted that in the Interlocutory Application, the reasons for delay in filing the connected writ appeal have been mentioned. It is, therefore, submitted that the delay of 35 days in filing the connected writ appeal may kindly be condoned.

¶24

Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 has opposed the application for condonation of delay.

¶25

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after going through the contents of the Interlocutory Application, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 35 days occasioned in filing the connected writ appeal. Hence, the instant Interlocutory Application is allowed and the delay of 35 days occasioned in filing the connected writ appeal is condoned.

¶26

The Registry is directed to register the connected writ appeal and list the same

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

before this Court for admission after 2(two) weeks.

¶29

This Interlocutory Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Paran Jyoti Saikia and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 2 Ors. v. Paran Jyoti Saikia and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhirendra Patowary Vs the State of Assam and 15 Ors.

Hafizur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Quazi Atiqur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors. F

Sanjay Kr Singh Vs Purbanchal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

Sanjay Kr Singh Vs Purbanchal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and 6 Ors.

The State of Assam and 3 Ors. Vs Purbanchal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and 3 Ors.