Disposed¶33

The Bajaj Allianz General Insuance Co. Ltd. v. Sefali Gope and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Apr 2025I.A.(Civil)/1624/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for filing a motor accident appeal; Gauhati High Court; Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sefali Gope and 3 Ors.; I.A.(Civil)/1624/2020 in MAC App/7161/2020 challenging judgment and award dated 05.12.2019 in MAC Case No. 19/2012 (Addl. Member-1, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Margherita, Tinsukia); service of notice on respondent no. 3 by paper publication proved through affidavit of compliance; delay of 8 days condoned; appeal ordered registered and listed for admission hearing after a week; order dated 04-04-2025.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 8 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal condoned; Registry directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list it for admission hearing after a week. ¶33

The Bajaj Allianz General Insuance Co. Ltd. Vs Sefali Gope and 3 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010131882020

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1624/2020 In MAC App/7161/2020

¶6

THE BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSUANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT GE PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD, NERADA, PUNE- 411006 AND NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE AT SREEJI TOWER, 2ND FLOOR, C/O- GAUHATI TEA WAREHOUSING PVT. LTD., ADJACENT TO MAHINDRA SHOWROOM, CHRISTIANBASTI, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781005, KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY IT'S LEGAL EXECUTIVE, CLAIMS DEPARTMENT, MR. NAYAN CHOUDHURY.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SEFALI GOPE AND 3 ORS. W/O- LT. PORIMAL GOPE, R/O- LEDO, DIST.- TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN786182.

¶9

2:MISS PAROMITA @ BULTI GOPE D/O- LT. PORIMAL GOPE R/O- LEDO DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786182. 3:SANTOSH SINGH S/O- SRI RAJ NARAYAN SINGH R/O VILL.- RANGPI P.O.- RANGPI P.S.- DIGBOI DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786171.

¶10

Page No.# 2/3

¶11

4:PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA S/O- SRI DILIP KUMAR SHARMA R/O- TINSUKIA NEAR TINSUKIA TRUCK STAND P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYYA,

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A K GUPTA (R-1), MR. R S MISHRA (R-1)

¶14

Linked Case :

¶15

THE BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSUANCE CO. LTD.

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

SEFALI GOPE AND 3 ORS. (H)

¶18

-----------Advocate for : Advocate for : appearing for SEFALI GOPE AND 3 ORS. (H)

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

04-04-2025

¶23

Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 & 2.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was directed to take steps for issuance of notice upon respondent no. 3 by paper publication and

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

accordingly he has taken steps for paper publication and also submitted affidavit of compliance.

¶27

After going through the affidavit of compliance in respect of service of notice upon respondent no. 3 through newspaper publication, this Court holds that the notices were duly served upon respondent no. 3.

¶28

This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the applicant-Insurance Company for condoning delay of 7 days in filing the MAC Appeal against the judgment and award dated 05.12.2019 passed in MAC Case No. 19/2012 by the learned Addl. Member-1, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Margherita, Tinsukia.

¶29

The applicant has submitted that the grounds of delay in preferring the connected MAC Appeal has been stated in paragraph 4 of the application for condonation of delay.

¶30

Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the claimant/opposite party has submitted that considering the grounds mentioned in the delay of condonation application he has no objection if the delay of 8 days is to be condoned.

¶31

After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as going through the grounds mentioned in paragraph 4 of the application of condonation of this Court is considered opinion that the delay in preferring the connected MAC Appl has been sufficiently explained.

¶32

In view of the above, the delay of 8 days in preferring the connected MAC appeal is hereby condoned.

¶33

IA is disposed of.

¶34

Registry is directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list it for admission hearing after a week.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

The Bajaj Allianz General Insuance Co. Ltd. v. Sefali Gope and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Bajaj Allianz General Insuance Co. Ltd. v. Sefali Gope and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

On the Death of Raichand Bararia His Legal Heirs Laxmi Bararia and 3 Ors. Vs M/S. Kishorilal Vijay Kumar H.U.F. and Anr.

On the Death of Raichand Bararia His Legal Heirs Laxmi Bararia and 3 Ors. Vs M/S. Kishorilal Vijay Kumar H.U.F. and Anr.

On the Death of Raichand Bararia His Legal Heirs Laxmi Bararia and 3 Ors. Vs M/S. Kishorilal Vijay Kumar H.U.F. and Anr.

Neha Sharma Vs Aman Agarwal

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Asma Bibi

Ramisa Begum @ Romisa Begum and Anr. Vs Anjuma Begum