Allowed¶27

Deep Jyoti Dutta and Anr. v. Chandra Kanta Gogoi and Anr.

Gauhati HC7 May 2026I.A.(Civil)/693/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; Section 5 Limitation Act 1963; 130 days delay; sufficient cause; Gauhati High Court; I.A.(Civil)/693/2026; order dated 08.05.2026; Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita; MACT No.2 Kamrup(M); MAC Case No.1061/2020; motor accident claims; award dated 13.05.2025; waiver of notice; ex-parte proceedings; IFFCO Tokio General Insurance; registration of MAC Appeal.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 130 days' delay in preferring the connected MAC Appeal; notice to respondent No.1 waived; Registry directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list it for admission after a week. ¶27

Deep Jyoti Dutta and Anr. Vs Chandra Kanta Gogoi and Anr. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010288952025

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/693/2026

¶6

DEEP JYOTI DUTTA AND ANR

¶7

S/O LATE KUMUD DUTTA, R/O LATE VILL- JUNAKI NAGAR, P.S.SILAPATHAR, DIST- DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-787059

¶8

2: KAWSHIK DUTTA S/O LATE KUMUD DUTTA R/O LATE VILL- JUNAKI NAGAR P.S.- SILAPATHAR DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-78705

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

CHANDRA KANTA GOGOI AND ANR S/O BIPIN GOGOI, R/O VILL.- BAM GAON, P.O. AND P.S.- SILAPATHAR, DIST.- DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN- 787059

¶11

2:IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER SERVICING OFFICE BRANCH SITUATED AT HOUSEFED COMPLEX 3RD FLOOR RUKMININAGAR NEAR H.D.F.C. BANK G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN-78101

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K DAS,

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R GOSWAMI(R2), MS. P BORTHAKUR(R2)

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 08.05.2026

¶18

Heard Mr. U.K. Das, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. D. Goswami, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶19

On perusal of the Office Note dated 04.05.2026, it appears that the notice issued to the respondent No.1 has returned without service.

¶20

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal also, the matter proceeded ex-parte against the respondent No.1. Hence, he prays for waiving notice to the respondent No.1 in this Interlocutory Application.

¶21

The prayer is allowed. The notice to the respondent No.1 is waived.

¶22

This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 130 days in preferring the connected appeal, whereby, the judgment and award dated 13.05.2025 passed by the MACT, No.2 Kamrup(M) in MAC Case No.1061/2020 has been impugned.

¶23

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the grounds for belated filing of the connected appeal have been stated by the applicant in Paragraph-3 & 4 of the instant application.

¶24

The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that considering the grounds stated in the instant Interlocutory Application, he does not have any objection if the delay is condoned in this case.

¶25

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides.

¶26

After considering the grounds stated in paragraphs 3 & 4 of the instant Interlocutory Application, this Court is of the considered opinion that same may be recorded as sufficient cause which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected appeal within the prescribed period of limitation.

¶27

Accordingly, the delay of 130 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this Interlocutory Application is allowed.

¶28

The Registry is directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list the same for admission

¶29

Page No.# 3/3

¶30

after a week on a date to be fixed by it.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Deep Jyoti Dutta and Anr. v. Chandra Kanta Gogoi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deep Jyoti Dutta and Anr. v. Chandra Kanta Gogoi and Anr.

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

MD Safiqul Islam Vs the State of Assam

MD Kuddus Ali Vs the Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Sonamukhi Basfore and Anr. Vs Rekha Basfore and Ors.

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Amena Khatun and 11 Ors.

Deben Doimary and Anr. Vs the New India Assurance Company Limited and 2 Ors.

Nayan Kalita @ Nayan Moni Kalita Vs Magma Hdi General Insurance Company Ltd. and 2 Ors.