Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025 of HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS on 14 June 2026
GAHC010092352025 2026:GAU-AS:8455 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025 HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RAMON HOUSE, H.T. PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION,
GAHC010092352025
2026:GAU-AS:8455
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1513/2025
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AND HEAD OFFICE AT RAMON HOUSE, H.T. PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION, MUMBAI 400020
ANDITS GUWAHATI BRANCH OFFICE AT ADITYAM BUILDING, 6TH
FLOOR, LACHIT AGAR, GS. ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN 781007.
VERSUS
SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS
W/O LATE FIRUJ ALI.
2:MD. SHAHRUK KHAN
S/O LATE FIRUJ ALI
BOTH ARE R/O VILL. BORIGAON
P.O. SOLMARI
P.S. MORIGAON
DIST. MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN 782002
3:MD. SAHABUDDIN AHMED
S/O SEKANDAR ALI
R/O VILL. RADHALA
P.S. MIKIRBHETA
DIST. MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN 782001
4:MD. HEDAYATULLAH
S/O MD. IBRAHIM ALI
R/O VILL. TOKUNABORI
P.S. MIKIRBHETA
DIST. MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN 78200
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI, MS. P BORTHAKUR,MS. M SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : MS P DAS (R-1,2), MR. K BORUAH(R-1,2),MR. M ALAM(R- 1,2),MS. P BORAH(R-1,2)
Linked Case :
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
VERSUS
SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS F
------------
Advocate for : MR. R GOSWAMI
Advocate for : appearing for SABINA BEGUM AND 3 ORS F
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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
Date : 15.06.2026 Heard Mr. Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Ms. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. K. Boruah, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
2. By way of the present interlocutory application, the applicant seeks condonation of a delay of 25 days in preferring the connected appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 passed by the learned Member, MACT, Morigaon, in MAC(Death) Case No. 03/2020.
3. The grounds of delay are explained as under: - “2. That as the Judgment and Award was passed on 09.09.2024 the last date for filing the appeal is 12.12.2024. But, since appeal has been filed on 06.01.2025, there has been a delay of 25 (twenty five) days in filing this appeal. Although the Judgment was delivered on 09.09.2024 by the Learned Member, MACT, Morigoan and application for the certified copy was made on 13.09.2024 the same however was made available to the advocate of the applicant on 25.09.2024 only. The dealing Advocate had forwarded it to the Guwahati Office on 27.09.2024. During such time the back-office official left the job and file was attended when new back office official joined and located the file and accordingly the file was processed on 24.10.2024. Accordingly, the matter was forwarded to Head Office on 25.10.2024 and further query was sought. The queries were later on clarified and head office opined for preferring an appeal in this matter on 28. 11.2024. After receiving the approval the Guwahati Office engaged an advocate from their panel of Advocates to file the appeal. However the cheque for statutory deposit was received on 28.12.2024 and the same was handed over to the engaged Counsel on 03.01.2025. The appeal was filed on 06.01.2025 but by the time the counsel of the Appellant could prepare the memorandum of appeal a delay of 25 (Twenty five) days have occurred.”
4. Ms. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel, submits that she has no instructions to oppose the prayer for condonation of delay.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the averments made in the application, this Court is satisfied that the delay has been adequately explained and that sufficient cause has been shown for not filing the appeal within the prescribed period.
6. Accordingly, the delay of 25 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.
7. The interlocutory application is allowed.
8. Let the appeal be registered and numbered.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant