AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Ms. R. D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. J. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 and Ms. K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.
Service of notice upon respondent No. 1, 2, 3 and 8 have been duly served but none has appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Ms. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the name of respondent Nos. 5 and 7 be struck off from the list of respondents as they are not a necessary parties.
In view of the submissions, let the name of respondent Nos. 5 and 7 be deleted from the list of respondents.
This is an application under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay of 295 days in filing the connected appeal which is directed against the judgment dated 01.03.2017, passed by the learned Member, MACT No. 1, Kamrup, in MAC Case No. 201/2012.
I have perused the explanation provided in paragraphs 3 to 9 of the accompanying application. I have also heard Ms. J. Talukar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 as well as Ms. K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 who submits that they have no objection if the delay of 295 days in not preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned.
On perusal of the explanation provided in the accompanying application as well as having heard the learned counsels for the parties, I am of the view that the application was prevented by sufficient cause in not preferring the connected appeal within the stipulated time.
In view thereof, the delay of 295 days in preferring the connected appeal is hereby condoned.
I.A. stands disposed of.