Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/2368/2025 of CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs SMTI TIKA TANTI AND 4 ORS on 17 September 2026
GAHC010072182025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2368/2025 CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT AASTHA PLAZA, OPPOSITE OF S.B. DEORAH COLLEGE, 4TH FLOOR, BORA SERVICE,
GAHC010072182025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2368/2025
CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT AASTHA PLAZA, OPPOSITE OF S.B.
DEORAH COLLEGE, 4TH FLOOR, BORA SERVICE, GUWAHATI, DIST.
KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. (REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, CLAIMS LEGAL, MR. KAIFI ANAM)
VERSUS
SMTI TIKA TANTI AND 4 ORS
W/O LATE RATAN RAY
2:SMTI MONI RAY
W/O SRI AJIT RAY
3:MISS SUMITA RAY
D/O LATE RATAN RAY
4:MISS NEHA RAY
D/O LATE RATAN RAY
ALL ARE R/O NO. 1 PITHA GHAT
P.O. AND P.S. URIAMGHAT
DIST. GOLAGHAT
ASSAM (THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 AND 4 BEING MINOR ARE
REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2)
5:DIPAK KR. DAS
S/O MANURANJAN DAS
C/O DWIJEN CH. KUMAR
R/O HOUSING COMPLEX SOCIETY
HOUSE NO. 300E
KAMAKHYA NAGAR
ADABARI
PANDU
GUWAHATI
DIST. KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
PIN 78101
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYYA, Advocate for the Respondent : MR G BHARADWAJ (R-1 TO 4),
Page No.# 3/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
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
18.09.2026
Heard Mr. A Bhattacharyya, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. B. Deuri, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 4. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay of 163 days in preferring the connected appeal. It may be mentioned that the notice upon the respondent no. 5 is yet to be served. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. Mr. Deuri has submitted that he has no objection if the delay is condoned. On the other hand, the delay has been satisfactorily explained. This court is of the opinion that going for issuing notice on the respondent no. 5 would be waste of time. Therefore, the delay is condoned. Registry shall register the connected appeal and list the same. The interlocutory application is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant