THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs PRADIP DAS AND 2 ORS Advocate - MR. R ALI, ,MR. M TALUKDAR,B SARMA,MR S KHAN,MISS. S PARBIN,MR H A AHMED — I.A.(Civil) /4000/2025
Case under Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 24th April 2026.
CNR: GAHC010251182025
e-Filing Number
11-11-2025
Filing Number
I.A.(Civil) /14445/2025
Filing Date
11-11-2025
Registration No
I.A.(Civil) /4000/2025
Registration Date
06-12-2025
Judge
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Coram
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10301 - Interlocutory Application (Civil) ( 382 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
24th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Adv. MR. P J BARMAN
Respondent(s)
PRADIP DAS AND 2 ORS Advocate - MR. R ALI, ,MR. M TALUKDAR,B SARMA,MR S KHAN,MISS. S PARBIN,MR H A AHMED
NAYAN DAS
NAYAN DAS,
APURBA DAS,
APURBA DAS
Hearing History
Judge: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDERS
ORDERS
ORDERS
ORDERS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 24-04-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 18-03-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 20-02-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 19-01-2026 | ORDERS |
Orders
Case Summary The Gauhati High Court granted National Insurance Co. Ltd.'s application to condone a 25-day delay in filing an appeal against a MACT judgment dated 09.07.2025 that awarded Rs. 11,40,361/- with 7% interest to claimants Pradip Das and others. The Court found sufficient grounds for the delay, noting the company's need to obtain legal opinion and internal approval, found no malafide intent, and directed the Registry to register the appeal while furnishing copies to respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Gauhati High Court granted National Insurance Co. Ltd.'s application to condone a 25-day delay in filing an appeal against a MACT judgment dated 09.07.2025 that awarded Rs. 11,40,361/- with 7% interest to claimants Pradip Das and others. The Court found sufficient grounds for the delay, noting the company's need to obtain legal opinion and internal approval, found no malafide intent, and directed the Registry to register the appeal while furnishing copies to respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts