Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/3193/2026 of BASER ALI AND 2 ORS. Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 6 October 2026
GAHC010166302026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3193/2026 BASER ALI AND 2 ORS. S/O- LT. SEKENDAR, RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI, P.S.- KHARUPETIA, P.S.- MANGALDAI, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM 2: MASEDA KAHATUN D/O
GAHC010166302026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3193/2026
BASER ALI AND 2 ORS.
S/O- LT. SEKENDAR, RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI, P.S.- KHARUPETIA, P.S.- MANGALDAI, DIST- DARRANG, ASSAM
2: MASEDA KAHATUN
D/O BASER ALI
RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI
P.S.- KHARUPETIA
P.S.- MANGALDAI
DIST- DARRANG
ASSAM
3: MAJEDA BEGUM
D/O BASER ALI
W/O ABUCHAMA ALI
RESIDENT OF VILL- GHENAMARI
P.S.- KHARUPETIA
P.S.- MANGALDAI
DIST- DARRANG
ASSA
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER, WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M AHMED, MR A. ALI,N. CHOUDHURY,A. K. KANU
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. C K S BARUAH(C.G.C.)
Linked Case : MACApp./0/0
BASER ALI
S/O- LATE. SEKENDAR
2: MASEDA KHATUN
D/O- BASER ALI
3: MAJEDA BEGUM
D/O- BASER ALI W/O- ABUCHAMA ALI ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL- GHENAMARI
P.SKHARUPETIA
DIST- DARRANG ASSAM
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER
WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY.
------------
Advocate for : MUZAMIL AHMED
Advocate for : appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
07.10.2026
1. Heard Mr. M Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants. None has appeared for the opposite parties, though the name of Central Government Counsel Mr. CKS Baruah has been shown as engaged counsel for the opposite parties.
2. Since none has appeared, this court intends to proceed with the case against the opposite parties.
3. This application has been filed by the petitioners, Baser Ali, Maseda Khatun and Majeda Begum under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 31 days in filing the connected MFA, wherein the judgment dated 29.04.2026 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in OA IIu-55/2025 is impugned.
4. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the reason for delay has been stated in paragraph No. 3 of the instant interlocutory application.
5. I have gone through the grounds stated in the instant application as well as considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the applilcants.
6. Upon considering the ground stated in paragraph No. 3 of the instant application, this court is of the opinion that the present applicants are prevented by sufficient cause in filing the connected MFA within the prescribed period of limitation. As such, the delay of 31 days in filing the connected MFA is hereby condoned and the present interlocutory application stands allowed.
7. The Registry is directed to register the connected MFA and list the same for admission after a week on a date to be fixed by the Registry.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant