Gauhati High Court
Md. Abdul Halim Sheikh @ Halim Sheikh vs United India Ins. Co. Ltd on 21 May, 2019
Author: Nelson Sailo
Bench: Nelson Sailo
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010092282015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MC 1472/2015
1:MD. ABDUL HALIM SHEIKH @ HALIM SHEIKH
S/O LATE NAZAR MD. ZAMMANDAR, R/O PATAINGTALA, P.S.
MANKACHAR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE G.S. ROAD, CHIRISTIAN BASTI, GUWAHATI 781005
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O P BHATI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B K PURKAYASTHA(R-1)
Linked Case : /
1:MD. ABDUL HALIM SHEIKH @ HALIM SHEIKH
VERSUS
1:UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD and 2 ORS
Advocate for the Petitioner :
Advocate for the Respondent :
Page No.# 2/4
Linked Case : I.A.(Civil) 1299/2019
1:MD. ABDUL HALIM SHEIKH @ HALIM SHEIKH
S/O LATE NAZAR MD. ZAMMANDAR
R/O PATAINGTALA
P.S. MANKACHAR
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD
REGIONAL OFFICE G.S. ROAD
CHRISTIAN BASTI
GUWAHATI 781005
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MONDAL
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B K PURKAYASTHA
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
Date : 21-05-2019 In view of the order passed today in I.A.(C) No. 1299/2019, the last sentence of paragraph No. 2 "However, no judgment and award was delivered on 29.08.2013 and no further date was given by the Learned Member" as well as the sentence "Though it is a fact on that day no award was passed" appearing at paragraph No. 4 shall stands deleted.
Office to make necessary corrections.
By filing this application, the applicant seeks condonation of 426 days delay in filing the connected appeal.
Mr. D. Mondal, the learned counsel by referring to paragraph Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the application submits that sometime in the middle of September, 2013, the applicant left for his native place at Pataingtala, P.S. Mankachar in the District of Dhubri, since he was unable to maintain himself and his family at Page No.# 3/4 Guwahati and also as he had not recovered from his injury i.e., fracture of right leg. Being an illiterate person, he had no means to contact his counsel at Guwahati. When he visited Guwahati on 16.12.2014 , he came to know that the judgment and award was passed by the Tribunal on 29.08.2013, by awarding him a sum of Rs. 5,000/- against his claim application. The applicant withdrew the awarded sum from the Tribunal and thereafter, requested his counsel to obtain a certified copy of the award for challenging the same before the High Court. His counsel applied for a certified copy on 27.01.2015 and obtained the same on the same day. The appeal was filed the very next day on 28.01.2015.
Under the circumstance, the learned counsel submits that the delay may be condoned.
Mr. BK Purkayastha, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that the award having been passed by the Tribunal on 29.08.2016, it is most unbelievable that the applicant came to learn about the same only on 16.12.2015. He submits that no explanation has been given by the applicant as to why he could not contact his appointed counsel in the Tribunal. Therefore, the delay being only deliberate and due to the laches on the part of the applicant, the same may not be condoned.
I have heard the submissions made by the counsels for the rival parties.
It is noticed that the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 who are the owner and driver of the vehicle involved in the accident were struck off from the arrayed respondents vide Order dated 20.02.2019 and therefore, it is solely the respondent No. 1 who remains.
The explanation made by the applicant appears to be rather sketchy, inasmuch as, illiteracy cannot be the ground to be unable to contact one's appointed counsel, more particularly when the applicant was able to engage the counsel before the Tribunal.
However, considering the fact that the native place of the applicant is at Patiangtak Village P.S. Mankachar in the District of Dhubri and he having Page No.# 4/4 suffered some injury due to the accident, I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be made, if the delay is condoned and the connected appeal be heard on merits. As such, the delay of 426 days in filing the connected appeal stands condoned.
I.A. accordingly stands disposed of JUDGE Comparing Assistant