Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/2407/2026 of BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. Vs DEBARUN BHATTACHARJEE on 26 July 2026
GAHC010148172026 2026:GAU- AS:10231-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2407/2026 BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT LOKMANGAL, 1501, SHIVAJINAGAR, PUNE- 411005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
GAHC010148172026
2026:GAU-
AS:10231-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2407/2026
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT LOKMANGAL, 1501, SHIVAJINAGAR, PUNE- 411005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2: BANK OF MAHARASHTRA
GUWAHATI ZONAL OFFICE
REPRESENTED BY MR. AKKABATHULA SANDEEP
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
S/O AKKABATHULA JACOB
CHIEF MANAGER
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007
DISTRICT KAMRUP M
ASSA
VERSUS
DEBARUN BHATTACHARJEE
S/O SRI DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE, R/O AJC BOSE LANE, MEHERPUR, HOUSE NO. 22, SILCHAR, ASSAM-788015
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A KHANIKAR, R L CHUTIA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A DHANUKA, FOR CAVEATOR,MR. A GANGULY
Linked Case : CRP/0/0
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA
HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT LOKMANGAL
1501
SHIVAJINAGAR
PUNE-411005
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2: MR AKKABATHULA SANDEEP
S/O AKKABATHULA JACOB
CHIEF MANAGER
BANK OF MAHARASHTRA
GUWAHATI ZONAL OFFICE
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007
DISTRICT KAMRUP M
ASSAM.
VERSUS
DEBARUN BHATTACHARJEE
S/O SRI DEEPAK BHATTACHARJEE
R/O AJC BOSE LANE
MEHERPUR
HOUSE NO. 22
SILCHAR
ASSAM-788015
------------
Advocate for : RAJIB LUSHAN CHUTIA
Advocate for : appearing for DEBARUN BHATTACHARJEE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
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
27.07.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. A. Dhanuka, learned counsel for the respondent. By filing this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the applicant is prayed for condoning the delay of 2 (two) days beyond the period of limitation by filing the connected appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer. Nonetheless, having regard to the nature of explanation tendered, the same is accepted as sufficient cause which prevented the applicant from filing the connected appeal on time. Accordingly, the delay of 2(two) days in the present connected appeal stands condoned. The Registry shall now register the connected appeal and list the same in the admission column.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant