Allowed¶35

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sabina Begum and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC14 Jun 2026I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of 25 days' delay; sufficient cause; appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988; MACT Morigaon; MAC(Death) Case No. 03/2020; judgment and award dated 09.09.2024; appeal filed 06.01.2025; HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd.; Sabina Begum and 3 Ors; Gauhati High Court; Kaushik Goswami, J.; I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025; order dated 15.06.2026; neutral citation 2026:GAU-AS:8455; appeal to be registered and numbered.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of the 25-day delay in filing the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988; the interlocutory application is allowed and the appeal is directed to be registered and numbered. ¶35

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sabina Begum… — Motor Accident Claims | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 25 days in filing the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 in MAC(Death) Case No. 03/2020 should be condoned.

¶28

Court's answer

The Court is satisfied that the delay has been adequately explained and that sufficient cause has been shown for not filing the appeal within the prescribed period.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

The delay of 25 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.

¶34

Key takeaways

The interlocutory application is allowed.ratio¶35
The appeal is to be registered and numbered.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Kaushik Goswami, J.), I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025, order dated 15.06.2026 - Condonation of delay. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. sought condonation of a 25-day delay in filing an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Morigaon, in MAC(Death) Case No. 03/2020. The causes shown were administrative: certified copy applied for on 13.09.2024 and made available on 25.09.2024; forwarded to the Guwahati Office on 27.09.2024; the back-office official having left the job, the file was processed on 24.10.2024; forwarded to Head Office on 25.10.2024; Head Office opined for preferring the appeal on 28.11.2024; the cheque for statutory deposit was received on 28.12.2024 and handed to counsel on 03.01.2025; the appeal was filed on 06.01.2025 against the last date of 12.12.2024. Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 had no instructions to oppose the prayer. Held: the delay was adequately explained and sufficient cause was shown; the 25-day delay stands condoned; the interlocutory application is allowed and the appeal is to be registered and numbered.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010092352025

2026:GAU-AS:8455

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025

¶6

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RAMON HOUSE, H.T. PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION, MUMBAI 400020 ANDITS GUWAHATI BRANCH OFFICE AT ADITYAM BUILDING, 6TH FLOOR, LACHIT AGAR, GS. ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN 781007.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS W/O LATE FIRUJ ALI.

¶9

2:MD. SHAHRUK KHAN

¶10

S/O LATE FIRUJ ALI BOTH ARE R/O VILL. BORIGAON P.O. SOLMARI P.S. MORIGAON DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 782002

¶11

3:MD. SAHABUDDIN AHMED

¶12

S/O SEKANDAR ALI R/O VILL. RADHALA P.S. MIKIRBHETA DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 782001

¶13

4:MD. HEDAYATULLAH

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

S/O MD. IBRAHIM ALI R/O VILL. TOKUNABORI P.S. MIKIRBHETA DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 78200

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI, MS. P BORTHAKUR,MS. M SAIKIA

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : MS P DAS (R-1,2), MR. K BORUAH(R-1,2),MR. M ALAM(R1,2),MS. P BORAH(R-1,2)

¶18

Linked Case :

¶19

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD

¶20

VERSUS

¶21

SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS F

¶22

-----------Advocate for : MR. R GOSWAMI Advocate for : appearing for SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS F

¶23

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Date : 15.06.2026

¶26

Heard Mr. Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Ms. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. K. Boruah, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶27

Page No.# 3/4

¶28

2. By way of the present interlocutory application, the applicant seeks condonation of a delay of 25 days in preferring the connected appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Morigaon, in MAC(Death) Case No. 03/2020.

¶29

3. The grounds of delay are explained as under: -

¶30

“ 2. That as the Judgment and Award was passed on 09.09.2024 the last date for filing the appeal is 12.12.2024. But, since appeal has been filed on 06.01.2025, there has been a delay of 25 (twenty five) days in filing this appeal. Although the Judgment was delivered on 09.09.2024 by the Learned Member, MACT, Morigoan and application for the certified copy was made on 13.09.2024 the same however was made available to the advocate of the applicant on 25.09.2024 only. The dealing Advocate had forwarded it to the Guwahati Office on 27.09.2024. During such time the back-office official left the job and file was attended when new back office official joined and located the file and accordingly the file was processed on 24.10.2024. Accordingly, the matter was forwarded to Head Office on 25.10.2024 and further query was sought. The queries were later on clarified and head office opined for preferring an appeal in this matter on 28. 11.2024. After receiving the approval the Guwahati Office engaged an advocate from their panel of Advocates to file the appeal. However the cheque for statutory deposit was received on 28.12.2024 and the same was handed over to the engaged Counsel on 03.01.2025. The appeal was filed on 06.01.2025 but by the time the counsel of the Appellant could prepare the memorandum of appeal a delay of 25 (Twenty five) days have occurred.”

¶31

4. Ms. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel, submits that she has no instructions to oppose the prayer for condonation of delay.

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the averments made in the application, this Court is satisfied that the delay has been adequately explained and that sufficient cause has been shown for not filing the appeal within the prescribed period.

¶34

6. Accordingly, the delay of 25 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.

¶35

7. The interlocutory application is allowed.

¶36

8. Let the appeal be registered and numbered.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sabina Begum and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sabina Begum 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

SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sazia Ahmed and 4 Ors.

Bijoy Kumar Singh Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Shahid Hossain Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Kuhinur Khatun and 3 Ors. Vs the Regional Manager and 4 Ors.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited Vs Miss Soniya Bedia and 2 Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kasim Uddin Mazumder and Anr.