THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. HOSENARA BEGUM AND 3 ORS
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 05 Jan 2022
- Bench
- DEVASHIS BARUAH
Outcome
Disposed of
The interlocutory application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Date : 05.01.2022 ORDER Heard Mr. DK Das, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. R Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not appeared on call in spite of service of notice. Page No.# 3/3 This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condoning the delay of 86 days in filing the connected regular second appeal. It has been averred in the said application that on account of communication gap the applicant was not aware of the result of the appeal and had no knowledge about the judgment and decree dated
Operative part
01.12.2017 passed in Title Appeal No.28/2016. Immediately on coming to learn about the same the applicant had taken steps. It has also been contended that the applicant resides in the remote part of Assam and as such it was not feasible for the applicant to immediately contact the lawyer for which the delay of 86 days occurred. I have perused the application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act and in my opinion the explanation given in the said application amounts to sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly the delay of 86 days is condoned. Registry to list the regular second appeal for admission under Order XLI Rule II CPC. The interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The interlocutory application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 05 Jan 2022. The bench was DEVASHIS BARUAH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.