Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/4/2026 of THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD, Vs SMTI. SAINJALI DIPHUSA AND 4 ORS on 11 May 2026
GAHC020009102025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/4/2026 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD, REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER ,DIVISIONAL OFFICE,DIMAPUR NAGALAND-797112 VERSUS SMTI. SAINJALI DIPHUSA AND 4 ORS
GAHC020009102025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL
PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/4/2026
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER ,DIVISIONAL OFFICE,DIMAPUR
NAGALAND-797112
VERSUS
SMTI. SAINJALI DIPHUSA AND 4 ORS
WIFE OF LATE TOKUDA HANSU.
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KHERANI GAON, PS- MANJA, SUB-DIVISION- DIPHU, DISTRICT- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM AND TEMPORARY RESIDENT OF
PURNA BAZAR, DIMAPUR NAGALAND
2:MASTER RANJIT HANSU
SON OF LATE TOKUDA HANSU
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KHERANI GAON
PS- MANJA
SUB-DIVISION-DIPHU
DISTRICT- KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM AND TEMPORARY RESIDENT OF PURNA BAZAR
DIMAPUR NAGALAND
3:MISS MAISMI HANSU
DAUGHTER OF LATE TOKUDA HANSU
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF KHERANI GAON
PS- MANJA
SUB-DIVISION-DIPHU
DISTRICT- KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM AND TEMPORARY RESIDENT OF PURNA BAZAR
DIMAPUR NAGALAND
4:SHRI SUNIL TAPPA
SON OD LATE BALU TAPPA
RESIDENT OF BENGENAKOWA RAILWAY CROSSING
GF ROAD GOLAGHAT-785702
TEMPORARY RESIDENT OF RIVER BELT COLONY
DIMAPUR NAGALAND
5:SHRI SAIDUL ISLAM
SON OF MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM
RESIDENT OF H/NO/ 78 A
PURANA BAZAR
DIMAPUR
NAGALAN
Advocate for the Petitioner : MEDO VERO, Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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 : 12.05.2026
Heard Mr. Medo Vero, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Z Kulnu, learned counsel for the respondent No.1, 2 and 3 and Ms. Mika H Aye learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 and 5.
2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 seeking for condonation of delay of 12 days in preferring the accompanying MAC Appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of paragraph 7 of the Interlocutory Application to submit that the delay caused was for reasons beyond the control of the appellants and there has been no inordinate delay or lapses in filing the appeal.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1, 2
and 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 and 5 have submitted that the delay may be condoned and the MAC appeal may be taken up for adjudication on merits.
5. Accordingly, the delay of 12 days in filing the connected MAC Appeal is thereby condoned.
6. Interlocutory Application is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant