Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/3381/2026 of ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs SMT BILAI MUCHAHARY AND ORS on 22 September 2026
GAHC010206692026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3381/2026 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD A CENTRAL GOVT. UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI, G.S. ROAD, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI - 781 007 REPRESENTED
GAHC010206692026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3381/2026
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
A CENTRAL GOVT. UNDERTAKING HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT
GUWAHATI, G.S. ROAD, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI - 781 007 REPRESENTED BY
THE ASSISTANT THANAGER, GAUHATI REGIONAL OFFICE, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI 781007.
VERSUS
SMT BILAI MUCHAHARY AND ORS
W/O LATE INDRAJIT MUCHAHARY,
2:MISS PHIRFILA MUCHAHARY
D/O LATE INDRAJIT MUCHAHARY
3:SMT KHAWTHALI MUCHAHARY
W/O LATE SABHARAM MUCHAHARY ALIAS SOBHANANDA
MUCHAHARY
ALL ARE RESIDENT OFVILLAGE - KUMARGAON BHANDRA BAZAR
P.O. - BHANDRA BAZAR
P.S. - BIJNI
DISTRICT - CHIRANG
B.T.A.D.
ASSAM. PIN -783390 OPPOSITE PARTY NO. 2 BEING REPRESENTED BY
OPPOSITE PAR
4:ARUN KUMAR JAISWAL
S/O KASHI PRASAD JAISWAL
R/O H. NO. - 91
PATHOR KUCHI
Page 1 of 3
SOMIN BORO GARBHANGA
P.O. - PATARKUCHI
P.S. - BASISTHA
DISTRICT - KAMRUP M
ASSAM. PIN 781029
5:AMIT JAISWAL
S/O KASHI PRASAD JAISWAL
H. NO. - 39
WARD NO. 58
TRIPURA ROAD
BELTOLA
P.O. - B ELTOLA
P.S. - BASISTHA
DISTRICT - KAMRUP M
ASSAM. PIN - 7810
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR, MR. S P SHARMA,MS. C MOZUMDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
Linked Case :
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
VERSUS
BILAI MUCHAHARY AND 4 ORS
------------
Advocate for : MS. R D MOZUMDAR
Advocate for : appearing for BILAI MUCHAHARY AND 4 ORS
Page 2 of 3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER
ORDER
23.09.2026
1. Heard Ms. R. D. Mazumdar, the learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The office note dated 22.09.2026 shows that the notice has been delivered on respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3 on 24.08.2026, and upon respondent No. 4 on 28.08.2026. Accordingly, the service on respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 is deemed to be complete. In respect of respondent No. 5, the unserved notice has returned back.
3. However, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that for the purposes of this application, the presence of respondent No. 5 is not required, and thus he may be struck off from the array of respondents.
4. Accordingly, the respondent No. 5 is struck off from the array of respondents. In spite of notice, respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 has not entered appearance. The instant application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act has been preferred by the applicants praying for condonation of delay of 10 (ten) days in filing the connected appeal against the judgment and order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the learned MACT, Chirang, Kajalgaon in MAC Case No. 04/2022. The learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the reasons for the delay has been stated at paragraph Nos. 3 to 7 of the application.
5. This Court has perused the same and find that sufficient cause has been shown by the applicants for the delay of 10 (ten) days caused in preferring the connected MAC Appeal. Consequently, the application is allowed and the delay of 10 (ten) days in filing the connected appeal is condoned.
6. The application stands disposed of.
7. The Registry shall register the main appeal and list the same for admission after one week.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…