: High Court Division Full List
 
Case Type
Case/Tender Number
Year
Parties
Short Description
 

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Md. Zahedul Hoque (Mithun)-Vs-Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and others
Discharged with modified direction
2
Md. Rubel Ahammed-Vs-Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education and others
Absolute with direction
3
Most. Afroza Khatun vs. Most. Jahanara Begum and others
According to sub-rule (1) of rule 22 of Order XXI of the Code, if an application for execution of a decree is made more than two years after the date of the decree, issuance of notice against the judgment-debtor is mandatory but according to sub-rule (3) of rule 22, no order of execution of decree shall be invalid by reason of omission to issue a notice under sub-rule (1). So, the provision of sub-rule (1) of rule 22 became redundant after incorporation of sub-rule (3) in Order XXI of the Code which follows that even if an application for execution is made more than two years after the date of the decree, the order of execution of the decree shall not be invalid by reason of the omission to issue a notice against the judgment-debtor.

The provisions of the Transfer of the Property Act, as discussed above, as well as the law declared by the Hon’ble Appellate Division in Sayed Jubayer Hossain, 28 BLC(AD) 50 (supra), clearly suggest that if an immovable property is mortgaged against security of loan empowering the mortgagee to sell the mortgaged-property in the event of his failing to repay the loan according to his contract, the mortgagee shall have the right to sell the property and if after mortgaging the property, the mortgagor transfers the same to others without the consent of mortgagee without the view of repaying the loan is nothing, but a fraudulent act and by dint of such transfer, the subsequent transferee will not acquire any right, title or interest in the mortgaged-property.
4
Muhammad Yusuf Choudhury and others vs. Musammat Dilruba and others.
A third party may be added as a defendant in a suit for specific performance of contract where he can prima facie establish an interest in the suit property as a co-sharer or where there exists some legal impediment affecting enforceability of the contract.
5
Government of Bangladesh and others Vs. Munshi Basir Uddin Ahammad and another
It is a settled principle of law that after the acquisition of rent-receiving interests, there remains only one class of tenants, namely raiyats under the Government, in respect of which S.A. Khatians are prepared and finally recorded in accordance with the provisions of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950. It is also a settled principle of law that once the Government has accepted rent from a raiyat in respect of a tenancy, it is estopped from challenging the title of such raiyat, and the raiyat acquires a valid title in the said tenancy.
6
Azahar Sharif and another Vs. Abdul Bareque and others
Endorsement of the registering officer in the deed as ‘‘Registered’’ under section 60 of the Registration Act, 1908 would be a strong presumptive evidence of the fact that the document was explained to the executant(s) before registration who admitted his execution and the receipt of consideration and that the whole proceeding and endorsement made therein were regular and in order and the said endorsement could only be rebutted by the adverse party by adducing strong evidence proving the allegation that fraud was committed upon the Sub-registrar.
7
Joarder Elias Rahman ...Convict-Appellant -Versus- The State and another ...Respondent
The appeal is allowed
8
Majeda Begum vs. Zipsam Developers Limited and others
A plain reading of sub-sections (1)-(4) of section 36 of the Real Estate Development and Management Act, 2010 as a whole suggests that those provisions stipulate alternative dispute resolution mechanism amicably or through appointing joint Arbitral Tribunal as per provision of Arbitration Act, 2001 at the instance of the developer, purchaser or the land owner at any stage of implementation of a real estate project in respect of offences provided under sections 21-25 and 27-30 of the Act, 2010 or violation of any terms of the contract between them and the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal would be binding upon them and the Arbitral Award cannot be questioned before any Court of law. The provision under sub-section (5) of section 36 of the Act, 2010 is very significant which clearly provides a forum to the parties to file case in an appropriate Court constituted under the Act, 2010 for their redress if they fail to constitute Arbitral Tribunal under section 36(3) of the Act, 2010 amicably. Except the offences arose out of the disputes between the parties as described in sections 21-25 and 27-30 of the Real Estate Development and Management Act, other disputes in regards implementation of the real estate project are not covered by section 36 of the Arbitration Act and in that case the parties concerned may resort to arbitration proceeding under section 12 of the Arbitration Act, 2001 to resolve the dispute or in the absence of any arbitration clause, in other appropriate court of law.
9
Md. Abdus Sobhan -Versus- The State and another
Discharged
10
Eastern Tower Flat Owners’ Co-operative Society Limited, represented by its Secretary-Vs-Dhaka Power Distribution Company Limited (DPDC), represented by its Managing Director, and others
Disposed of with direction
11
Anup Kumar Guha Biswas -Versus- The State and another
Absolute
12
A.K.M. Nazmul Hossian -Versus- The State and another
Dismissed
13
ENMA LIMITED CORPORATION Vs. M.V. KITANA AND OTHERS.
disposed of
14
Chandan Ghos -Vs- The State
Discharged
15
Md. Parvez @ Shahin Parvez -Vs- The State
Absolute
16
Enginner Amin Ahmed Raja ...Convict-Petitioner. -Versus- The State and another ...Complainant-Opposite Parties.
The Rule is discharged
17
Md. Nazrul Islam @ Mojibul and others -Vs- The State, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Chapai Nawabganj
Discharged
18
Rouson Ara Mia -vs- The state and another
Absolute
19
Rouson Ara Mia -vs- The state and another
Absolute
20
Rouson Ara Mia -vs- The state and another
Absolute
21
Rouson Ara Mia -Vs- The state and another
Absolute
22
Government of peoples Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Jhenaidah -Versus- Hedaetulla and others
.
23
Nurul Akbar being dead his heirs- Mst. Laila Begum and others Vs. Azizul Haque and others
.
24
Md. Rabiul Islam -Versus- The State and another
Dismissed
25
Dr. S.M. Nazmul Haque -Versus- The State
Dismissed
26
Joinal Abedin -Versus- The State and another
Dismissed
27
Md. Anisur Rahman and others … Plaintiff-Petitioners Versus Md. Newaj Ahmed and others ... Defendant-Opposite parties
Discharged
28
Mohammad Junayed -Versus- The State and another
Discharged
29
Md. Younus Miah -Versus- The State and another
appeal is allowed
30
Rozi Hasna -Versus- The State
Discharged
31
Shahinur Haldar -Versus- The State and another
Disposed of
32
Md. Tayabur Rahman -versus- The State and another
Discharged
33
Buddha Deb Mukherjee being dead his heirs- Prodip Kumar Mukherjee and others -Versus- Md. Afrozur Rahman and others
.
34
Mohammad Nurunnabi Talukder Vs. Export Import Bank of Bangladesh Limited, Chattogram and others
.
35
Abdul Aziz Vs. Ashok Kumar Dhanuka and others
.
36
Province of East Pakistan, (now) Government of Bangladesh Vs. Kanu Mia
.
37
Md. Syedur Rahman alias Mostaq alias Mostuq -Vs- The State represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Rajbari
Discharged.
38
Mohammad Wali Ullah Shaheen -Vs- Majedul Islam and another
Discharged with modification.
39
Shamsunnesa Choudhury @ Begum and others -vs-Bangladesh represented by the Deputy Commissioner Sunamganj
Discharged
40
Salah Uddin Ahmed alias Mohan -Vs- The State
Discharged.
41
Abdul Hakim -Vs- The State
Discharged.
42
Rashed -Vs- The State
Discharged with modification
43
Md. Monowar Hossain -Vs- The State
Absolute.
44
Mizanur Rahman (Faruk)-Vs- The State
Absolute.
45
Md. Akkas Ali -Vs- The State and another
Absolute-in-part.
46
Md. Zahedul Huq@ Helal -vs- The state
Allowed
47
Md. Faruk Hawlader -Vs- The State and another
Dismissed with modification
48
Bacchu Miah and another -vs- The State
Discharged
49
Sarif -Vs- The State
Allowed.
50
Md. Jakir -Vs-The State and anaother
Disposed of.
This Site is Visited :