I.A. 1296/2015. Gauhati High Court

Case Number:I.A. 1296/2015
Judgement Date:February 23, 2021
Court:Gauhati High Court

I N THE GAUHATI HI GH COURT

( THE HI GH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MI ZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

I .A. NO. 1296/ 2015

The I CI CI Lombard General I nsurance Co. Ltd.

…..Petitioner

-Vs-

Shri Rup Nath Brahma Choudhury & another

…. Respondents

For the petitioner : Mr. AJ Saikia,

Mr. N. Bhuyan,

Mr. K. Borah,

Mr. UK Dutta,

Mr. B. Kakati, Advs.

For the respondents: Mr. H. Das, for res.No.1.

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE KALYAN RAI SURANA

Date of hearing

& Judgment : 23-02-2017

JUDGMENT & ORDER

1) I have heard Mr. A.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr.

H. Das, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1. None appears on call for the respondent No.2.

2) By filing this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the petitioner has prayed for condonation of 99 days delay beyond the period of limitation in filing the accompanying appeal against the judgment and award passed in a motor accident claims case.

3) I n paragraph 4, 5 and 6 of the application, the applicant has made the below quoted statements:-

“4. That, your humble petitioner begs to state that as a Private Sector Undertaking, it is required to act strictly as per the laid down procedures and as such, the files are required to be routed from one

I.A. No.1296/15 Page 1 of 5

office to another and from one table to another and thereafter only the final decision as to whether to prefer an appeal or not is taken after obtaining the opinion of the dealing advocates as well as the advocate practicing in High Court and in this procedural aspect, a considerable time is spent.

  1. That, your humble petitioner begs to submit that in order to take a decision whether an appeal is to be filed or not, the files are required to be collected from dealing advocate and then it is processed from the policy issuing Branch to the dealing Regional Office and thereafter to the Head Office, who also requires legal opinion from the Company’s advocate before coming to a decision and consequently, it is quiet natural that considerable time is spent in movement of the file from one office to another and from one table to another and taking decision thereon. In this case the dealing office of the petitioner Company received the copy of the judgment and award along with the opinion of the advocate on 03.03.2015 and the said Office after completing all formalities sent the entire file to Kolkata Regional Office and all these took time to reach Regional office in the third week of March 2015...

To continue reading

Request your trial