MC 2680/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. UPADHYAY Heard Mr. B. Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. Heard also le arned counsel representing the opposite parties. By this application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 a pray er has been made by the applicants for condonation of delay of 180 days in prefe rring the connected appeal. The applicants have stated that the MACT Case No.107/2006 which was fina lly heard on 26.10.2009 was disposed of on 7.11.2009 However, in the meantime, t he applicants along with their severely injured daughter had to go to Delhi for her treatment. However, in the meantime, they came to know at Delhi that their c laim petition was dismissed on 17.11.2009. The applicants immediately instructed their counsel to apply for the certified copy of the judgment and accordingly t he counsel applied for the certified copy of the judgment dated 17.11.2009 and r eceived the same on 21.11.2009. The applicants came back to Tinsukia on 9.4.2010 to take possession of the entire materials and the copies of the aforesaid docu ments from counsel at Tinsukia having decided to proceed to Guwahati on 8.4.2010 to consult the counsel at Guwahati. However, as suggest by their counsel on 9.4 .2010, at Guwahati, they had to rush back to Tinsukia, to bring a few more docum ents. However, at Tinsukia, the applicants found that their counsel at Tinsukia was not available on the eve of Bihu holidays and thereafter the applicants coul d meet him only on 20.4.2010, for collecting the aforesaid records and documents . But as the applicants and their injured daughter had to leave for Delhi for fu rther Medical advice on 30.4.2010, they could not hand over the materials to the ir counsel at Guwahati. All the resultant factors caused delay in filing the con nected appeal. The respondents has filed objection to the prayer for condonation of del ay. I have perused the objection raised by the respondents/opposite parties and heard the learned counsel representing on behalf of the respondents/opposite par ties. I have taken into consideration the objection which has been filed on be half of the opposite parties. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances and the materials availabl e on record and on due consideration of the objection raised by the opposite par ties I find there are good and sufficient reasons for condoning the delay in fil ing the connected appeal. Accordingly, the prayer for condonation of delay of 180 days in preferri ng the connected appeal is hereby condoned. The Misc. Case stands disposed of.