Allowed

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Bornali Das Hazarika and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC13 Sept 2026I.A.(Civil)/2277/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an interlocutory application filed by New India Assurance Co. Ltd. for condonation of a 22-day delay in preferring a connected MAC appeal. The notice to the State and Forest Officer was waived due to respondent assent.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 22-day delay in preferring connected MAC appeal allowed; registry directed to register and list appeal.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Bornali… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010129552026

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2277/2026

¶5

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 87, M.G. ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI400001 AND ONE OF THE NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE AT LACHIT NAGAR, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM- 781007

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

SMT. BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND 6 ORS W/O LATE BIPUL HAZARIKA, R/O BEZ GAON, P.O.- NAKHANA, P.S.GAURISAGAR, DIST.- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN- 785664

¶8

2:PABITRA HAZARIKA S/O LATE BIPUL HAZARIKA R/O BEZ GAON P.O.- NAKHANA P.S.- GAURISAGAR DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 785664

¶9

3:SMT. SUBHA LAKSHI HAZARIKA D/O LATE BIPUL HAZARIKA R/O BEZ GAON P.O.- NAKHANA P.S.- GAURISAGAR DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 785664

¶10

4:RAM KUMAR R REEHAL S/O RULIARAM REEHAL R/O NEAR RAJKAPUR BUNGLOW A/7 LARAPOSE APARTMENT DEONAR FARM ROAD

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

T.F. DEONAR S.O.T.F. DEONAR MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA- 400088 ALSO AT R/O CHANMARI KOHIMA DIST.- NAGALAND PIN- 797001 5:ANIL KUMAR YADAV S/O PHOOL CHAND YADAV R/O VPO- KACHAGAON NEWADA P.S.- LINE BAZAR NEWADA DIST.- JAUNPUR UTTAR PRADESH PIN- 222002 6:THE STATE OF ASSAM THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 6 KAMRUP (M) 7:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SIVASAGAR OFFICE OF THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SIVASAGAR DISTRICT (T) P.O. AND DIST.- SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640 ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R K BHATRA, MS. R DAS,A BIYANI

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST, MS. A LALA(R1,2,3),MS N KASHYAP(R1,2,3),MRS R BEGUM(R1,2,3),MR P KATAKI, SR. ADV.(R1,2,3)

¶15

Linked Case : C.APPLN/0/0

¶16

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 87 M.G. ROAD FORT MUMBAI 400001 AND ONE OF THE NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL

¶17

Page No.# 3/5

¶18

OFFICE AT LACHIT NAGAR G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI ASSAM 781007

¶19

VERSUS

¶20

SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS W/O LATE BIPUL HAZARIKA

¶21

-----------Advocate for : Akanksha Biyani Advocate for : appearing for SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS

¶22

Linked Case : RP(FAM.CT.)/0/0

¶23

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 87 M.G. ROAD FORT MUMBAI 400001 AND ONE OF THE NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE AT LACHIT NAGAR G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI ASSAM 781007

¶24

VERSUS

¶25

SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS W/O BIPUL HAZARIKA

¶26

-----------Advocate for : Akanksha Biyani Advocate for : appearing for SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS

¶27

Linked Case : C.APPLN/0/0

¶28

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 87 M.G ROAD FORT MUMBAI 400001 AND ONE OF NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE AT LACHIT NAGAR G.S. ROAD

¶29

Page No.# 4/5

¶30

GUWAHATI ASSAM 781007

¶31

VERSUS

¶32

SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS W/O LATE BIPUL HAZARIKA

¶33

-----------Advocate for : Akanksha Biyani Advocate for : appearing for SMT BORNALI DAS HAZARIKA AND ORS

¶34

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶35

ORDER

¶36

14.09.2026

¶37

1. Heard Mr. R. K. Bhatra, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. R. Begum, the learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

¶38

2. On perusal of the office note dated 08.09.2026, it appears that the notice issued to opposite party No. 7 has been duly served.

¶39

3. It appear that the notices, which were issued to opposite party Nos. 4 and 5 could not be served through speed post.

¶40

4. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicant Insurance Company praying for condonation of delay of 22 days in preferring the connected MAC appeal.

¶41

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the cause of delay has been stated by the present applicant in paragraph Nos. 3 to 8 of the instant Interlocutory Application.

¶42

Page No.# 5/5

¶43

6. Ms. R. Begum, the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1, 2, and 3/claimants has submitted that the claimants do not have any objection if the delay is condoned.

¶44

7. As the claimants are not opposing to the condonation of delay, hence, the notice to opposite party Nos. 4 and 5 is hereby waived.

¶45

8. It appears on perusal of the grounds stated in the instant Interlocutory Application that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause in preferring the connected MAC appeal within the prescribed period of limitation.

¶46

9. As such, the delay of 22 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned, and this Interlocutory Application is allowed.

¶47

10. The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC appeal and list the same for admission hearing after a week on a date to be fixed by the Registry.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Comparing Assistant

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Bornali Das Hazarika and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Bornali Das Hazarika and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases