Gauhati High Court
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs On The Death Of Sanjib Konwar His Legal ... on 1 August, 2022
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010091612015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MC/1292/2015
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ORIENTAL HOUSE A 25/27 ASAF ALI
ROAD, NEW DELHI 110002 AND REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI-7,
REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER
VERSUS
ON THE DEATH OF SANJIB KONWAR HIS LEGAL HEIRS REPRESENTED BY
S/O SRI MAKHAN KONWAR, R/O PARBOTIA, TINSUKIA, P.O. TINSUKIA, P.S.
TINSUKIA, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM.
1.1:BITHIKA KONWAR
D/O LATE SANJIB KONWAR
RESIDENT OF PARBOTIA
TINSUKIA'
P.O. TINSUKIA P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA
ASSAM
1.2:ARUNAV KONWAR
S/O LATE SANJIB KONWAR
RESIDENT OF PARBOTIA TINSUKIA
P.O. TINSUKIA P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA
ASSAM
2:GANESH KUMAR
S/O SRI HIRALAL PRASAD
R/O DHEKIAJULI
P.O. TINSUKIA
Page No.# 2/3
P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA
ASSAM DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23/E-3123
3:MRINAL SAIKIA
S/O SRI RAJEN SAIKIA
R/O NATUN GAON
P.O. TINSUKIA
P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA
ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23/E-3123
4:SMT. MITALI GOGOI KONWAR
W/O SRI SANJIB KONWAR
R/O PARBOTIA
P.O. TINSUKIA
P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA
ASSAM OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23/C-5727
5:THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HAVING ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT RANGAGORA ROAD
TINSUKIA
P.O. TINSUKIA
P.S. TINSUKIA
DIST. TINSUKIA INSURER OF THE VEHICLE NO. AS-23/C-572
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : MS.L SHARMAR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 01.08.2022 Heard Ms. C. Borah, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. H. Buragohain, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.
As per order dated 18.01.2017, this Court has recorded that steps on Page No.# 3/3 respondent Nos. 1 to 5 has been completed. Subsequently, it is brought to the notice that the respondent No. 1 had expired in the meantime, thereafter, steps for substitution was duly undertaken by the applicant/Insurance Company. Vide order dated 08.11.2021 passed in I.A.(C) No. 284/2017, the substitution petition was allowed.
It is submitted at the bar that the substituted respondents are already represented by the learned counsels. However, steps on newly impleaded respondents could not be taken.
The learned counsel for the applicant is granted 2(two) weeks further time to complete the process of service of notice by registered post.
List this matter after 2(two) weeks.
Registry is directed to make the necessary endorsements in the cause title of this I.A. as well as in the accompanying MAC Appeal filed in terms of the order dated 08.11.2021 passed in I.A.(C) No. 284/2017 by which the legal heirs of respondent No. 1 has been substituted.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant