Allowed

Monumoi Rabha v. Jehirul Islam and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Aug 2024I.A.(Civil)/979/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application seeks condonation of a 28-day delay in filing an appeal against a MAC judgment. The court found sufficient cause for the delay, with no opposition from the respondent. The appeal will be registered and listed.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 28 days in preferring the connected appeal is condoned; the appeal will be registered and listed for admission.

Monumoi Rabha Vs Jehirul Islam and 2 Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010047272024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/979/2024

¶5

MONUMOI RABHA W/O LATE HITESWAR RABHA, VILL.- HATIGAON, P.S.- GOALPARA, DIST.- GOALPARA, ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS JEHIRUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS. S/O SRI EYAQULE ALI, VILL.- NABIN NAGAR, P.O. AND P.S.- BALADMARI, DIST.- GOALPARA, ASSAM.

¶7

2:PYARIMOHAN SARMAH S/O LATE S.M. SARMAH

¶8

VILL.- KALITAPARA WARD NO. 10 GOALPARA TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- GOALPARA ASSAM.

¶9

3:THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781005

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. D GOGOI,MR. P K BORAH,MR SAURADEEP DEY

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. K K BHATTA (r-3),

Page No.# 2/3

Linked Case :

MONUMOI RABHA

VERSUS

JEHIRUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS. E

¶17

-----------Advocate for : MR S BORTHAKUR Advocate for : appearing for JEHIRUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS. E

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 09-08-2024

¶21

Heard Mr. P. H. Konwar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the applicant. I have also heard Mr. K. K. Bhatta, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.

¶22

The notice upon the respondent no. 1 returned un-served with the comment that the respondent does not live in the said address and the notice upon the respondent no. 2 was duly received.

¶23

In view of the above, the notice is treated to have been completed in respect of respondent no. 2. However, no one appears on behalf of respondent no. 2.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

This is an application filed under the second proviso of Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1973 praying for condonation of delay of 28 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.08.2022, passed by the learned Member, MACT No. 3, Kamrup (M), in MAC case no. 3290/2008.

¶26

The reason for delay in not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time has been explained in para 3 of the condonation petition.

¶27

On going through the said paragraph, this Court is satisfied that the applicant has been able to show sufficient cause for not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time. Moreover, the learned counsel for the respondent has no objection if the delay of 28 days in preferring the connected appeal is condoned.

¶28

In view of the above, the delay of 28 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned.

¶29

With the above, this IA stands disposed of.

¶30

The Office shall register the connected appeal, and list it for admission, by reflecting the name of Mr. K.K. Bhatta, as the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Monumoi Rabha v. Jehirul Islam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monumoi Rabha v. Jehirul Islam 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

Smti Kanti Devi Vs the National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Md. Manowar Hussain Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

On the Death of Late Sunil Kumar, Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Juju Kuli Pamey @ Juju Pame and 3 Ors. Vs Cholamandalam Ms Gen Ins Company Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Sikta Rani Das and 4 Ors. Vs Md. Jiyabul Hussain Mazumder and 2 Ors.

Gwmwthao Basumatary Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.