Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/3941/2026 of ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs MUSST. KARIMAN NESA AND 4 ORS on 10 November 2026
GAHC010201282026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3941/2026 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ( A CENTRAL GOVT. UNDERTAKING) HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI, G.S. ROAD, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI - 781 007 REPRESENTED BY THE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010201282026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3941/2026
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 MANAGER, GAUHATI REGIONAL OFFICE, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI 781007
VERSUS
MUSST. KARIMAN NESA AND 4 ORS
W/O LATE SAHJAHAN ALI @ SHAJAHAN ALI,
2:MUSST. CHAJAMAN NECHA
W/O MD. INTAJ ALI
3:MD. INTAJ ALI
S/O LATE AHMED ALI
ALL ARE RESIDENT OF - VILLAGE - SHINGITALI
P. O. - SINGITOLI
P.S. - TEZPUR
DISTRICT - SONITPUR
ASSAM. PIN -784025
4:MD. LAL MIA
(OWNER)
S/O LATE MUGAL HUSSAIN
R/O. - VILLAGE - GOTLONG GAON
P.O. - KALIA BHOMORA
P.S. - TEZPUR
DISTRICT - SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 784027
Page No.# 2/2
5:MD. ISMAIL ALI (DRIVER)
S/O KUTUB UDDIN
R/O. - VILLAGE - KARAYANI BENGALI
P.O. - PANCHMILE
P.S. - TEZPUR
DISTRICT - SONITPUR
ASSAM. PIN - 78402
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R D MOZUMDAR, MR. S P SHARMA,MS. C MOZUMDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
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
Date : 11.11.2026
Heard Mr. S. P. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant.
2. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 35 days in filing the connected appeal.
3. I have found that the delay has been satisfactorily explained.
4. This Court is of the opinion that going for issuing notice upon the respondents would be nothing but a sheer waste of time. Therefore, the delay is condoned.
5. The connected appeal shall be registered and listed for admission hearing. The IA is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant