Disposed¶[9]

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smti. Rita Boro and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC10 May 2026I.A.(Civil)/734/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay — Gauhati High Court, Mridul Kumar Kalita J., 11.05.2026, I.A.(Civil)/734/2026 in MAC App. Case No. 1865/2026: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. sought condonation of 12 days' delay under Section 5, Limitation Act 1963, in appealing the MACT Bongaigaon judgment dated 06.11.2025 in MAC Case No. 320/2019; prayer unopposed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4; grounds held sufficient cause; delay condoned and IA disposed of; Registry directed to register appeal and list for admission on 26.05.2026; notice on respondent No. 3 held duly served.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 12 days' delay in preferring the connected MAC Appeal; interlocutory application disposed of; Registry directed to register the connected MAC Appeal and list it for admission on 26th May, 2026. ¶[9]

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smti. Rita Boro and 3 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010033352026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/734/2026

¶6

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.

¶7

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 24, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600014 AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI-5, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SMTI. RITA BORO AND 3 ORS. W/O SANJOY RABHA, VILL.- KATHALKUCHI, P.O.- SINGRA, P.S.- BOKO, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781135.

¶10

2:SMTI MAHIMA BORO W/O SRI LAKHAN BORO VILL.- MIRZAGHAT (BAGHPARA) P.O.-BONDAPARA P.S.-BOKO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781135

¶11

3:MUNINDRA BORO S/O LATE SABIN BORO VILL.- BHOGDABARI P.O.- BOKO P.S.- BOKO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781123

¶12

4:PURNA DAS S/O ATUL DAS VILLAGE- KATAHBARI (BARKHAL) P.O.- SANTIPUR

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

P.S- BOKO DISTRICT - KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-78114

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SISHIR DUTTA, S K BEGUM,MS. M CHOUDHURY

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : MR R CHAKRAVORTY(R4), MR. P SARMAH(R4),R BASUMATARY(R4)

¶17

¶18

MAC App. Case No. 1865/2026 With MAC App. Case No. 1865/2026 (filing number)

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

11.05.2026

¶23

[1] Heard Ms. M. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A.K. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as Mr. R. Chakraborty, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

¶24

[2] On perusal of the Office Note dated 06.05.2026, it appears that the AD Card sent along with the notice issued to respondent No. 3 has returned with signature of one Sabita Boro thereon.

¶25

[3] The notice issued to respondent No. 3 is also held to be duly served.

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

[4] This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been preferred by the applicant, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. for condonation of delay of 12 days in preferring the connected MAC Appeal.

¶28

[5] Now the appellant has impugned the judgment dated 06.11.2025, passed by the MACT Bongaigaon in MAC Case No. 320/2019.

¶29

[6] The cause of delay has been stated by the applicant in paragraph No. 4 of the instant interlocutory application.

¶30

[7] The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and 4 have not objected to the prayer for condonation of delay.

¶31

[8] After going through the grounds stated in the paragraph No. 4 of the instant interlocutory application, this court is of the opinion that the said grounds may be regarded as sufficient cause, which prevented the applicant in preferring the connected MAC Appeal within prescribed period of limitation.

¶32

[9] Accordingly, the delay of 12 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application, is disposed of.

¶33

[10] The Registry is directed to register the connected MACAppeal and list the same for admission on 26^th May, 2026.

¶34

[11] The name of learned counsel for the

¶35

Page No.# 4/4

¶36

respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 be reflected in the cause list henceforth.

¶37

JUDGE