|
Case Number
|
Parties |
Short Description |
|
1 |
Company Matter 607/2026
(Company Matter 607/2026)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Prof. Dr. Abul Kashem. -Versus- Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms and others. |
i) Dispatching notice packages via a private commercial courier agency constituted "personal service." This argument misconstrues the legal nature of personal service. Personal service in company law requires direct physical delivery by an officer, agent, or employee acting directly on behalf of the company to the recipient member. When a company hands over thousands of sealed envelopes to an independent third-party commercial courier company, it engages an intermediary logistics provider. The courier`s sub-agents or delivery staff are not company officers delivering notice personally; they are executing a contract of carriage. Courier delivery cannot be conflated with personal delivery.
ii) Equally untenable is the proposition that courier delivery is equivalent to "service by post." In statutory construction, "post" refers specifically to the statutory postal system operated under the authority of the State (e.g., the Post Office Act). The legal deeming presumption established under Article 86(2) and reflected in Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 attaches strictly to letters placed in the official postal network with postage prepaid. Courts cannot stretch clear contractual text to read private commercial courier services into the word "post." While modern commercial practice frequently uses courier networks for speed and tracking, corporate constitutions must be amended through proper general body resolutions if modern delivery methods are to be adopted. Until the Articles are formally altered, the company remains bound by its existing contractual provisions. |
|
2 |
Arbitration Application 14/2023
(Arbitration Application 14/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Manikganj Power Generations Limited.-Versus- Yew Choon Private Limited |
i) The distinction between the legal burden and the evidential burden must be carefully maintained. The legal burden of establishing the claim remained throughout upon the respondent as claimant. However, once the respondent/claimant had adduced evidence capable of supporting its case, the Tribunal was fully entitled to examine whether the petitioner had produced evidence explaining or rebutting facts lying particularly within its “own knowledge”. The Tribunal`s observations regarding the inadequacy of the petitioner`s evidence, therefore, relate to the weight and sufficiency of the rebuttal evidence rather than to any impermissible reversal of the legal burden of proof. ii) In substance, the petitioner`s grievance is that the Tribunal ought to have attached greater weight to the petitioner`s evidence and lesser weight to the respondent`s evidence. Such a contention goes to the appreciation of evidence rather than to the legality of the award. Section 43 does not permit this Court to undertake a fresh evaluation of the evidence for the purpose of determining whether another conclusion would have been preferable. iii) After considering the overall outcome of the arbitration, the Tribunal regarded the respondent as the substantially successful party and exercised the statutory discretion vested in it under section 38 by directing the petitioner to bear the respondent`s costs. Such an exercise of discretion cannot be said to be irrational merely because another tribunal, or even this Court, might have apportioned the costs differently. To interfere with the award of costs in the present case would require this Court to substitute its own discretion for that of the Tribunal. Such an approach would be inconsistent with the limited supervisory jurisdiction conferred by section 43 of the Arbitration Act and would undermine the legislative policy of according finality to arbitral awards. |
|
3 |
Company Matter 125/2016
(Company Matter 125/2016)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Rokaiya Nasrin, -Versus- Neptune Cold Storage Ltd. and others |
If the pre-emption provision was intended to protect the existing shareholders against the introduction of an outsider, a shareholder intending to exercise that right would reasonably be expected to assert it when the proposed transfer came to his or her knowledge. Yet, even after the Petitioner expressly sought rectification by her letters dated 21.01.2016 and 09.02.2016, no shareholder came forward either to purchase the shares or to object on the ground that he or she intended to exercise the right of pre-emption. Nor has any competing claim been asserted throughout the prolonged pendency of the present proceeding. In these circumstances, the Court is not persuaded that the pre-emption clause can now be invoked merely as a technical objection to the Petitioner`s claim when the very persons for whose benefit the provision was incorporated have, with full knowledge of the transaction and the Petitioner`s claim, neither exercised nor asserted the right for many years. Their prolonged and conscious inaction, in the circumstances of the present case, amounts to waiver or acquiescence in the transfer and substantially undermines the Respondents` reliance upon the pre-emption provision. |
|
4 |
Criminal Revision 2571/2025
(Criminal Revision 2571/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Kobir Uddin Biswas vs The State and another |
s. 138A NI Act has overriding effect over s. 246(2A) of the Cr.PC. |
|
5 |
Writ Petition 563/2025
(Writ Petition 563/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Bengal Aitken Spence Travels Limited-Vs-Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism |
Absolute in part with direction |
|
6 |
Writ Petition 4920/2025
(Writ Petition 4920/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Eftekharul Islam-Vs-The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief and others |
Absolute with direction |
|
7 |
Writ Petition 13988/2023
(Writ Petition 13988/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Mostofa Jaman Sheikh and others-Vs-Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Youth and Sports and others |
Absolute with direction |
|
8 |
First Appeal 178/2009
(First Appeal 178/2009)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Janata Bank Ltd Vs. M/S Hoque Commercial Syndicate and others |
Allowed |
|
9 |
Writ Petition 11839/2017
(WP_11839_2017)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Asaduzzaman vs The Government of Bangladesh |
Discharged |
|
10 |
Civil Revision 2022/2016
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Nure Alam Vs. Md. Mamun and others |
.. |
|
11 |
Writ Petition 4038/2015
(Writ Petition 4038/2015)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Mr. S.M. Zahid Hasan versus Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Banking Division), Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka and others |
Absolute |
|
12 |
Writ Petition 11058/2018
(Writ Petition 11058/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Kartik Chandra Sarker and another versus The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Shahbag, Dhaka and others |
Disposed of |
|
13 |
Writ Petition 2028/2010
(Writ Petition 2028/2010)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Balal Hossain and others versus The Secretary, Bangladesh Parliament, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207 and others |
Absolute |
|
14 |
Writ Petition 1819/2010
(Writ Petition 1819/2010)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Manik Hossain versus The Secretary, Bangladesh Parliament, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207 and others |
Absolute |
|
15 |
Writ Petition 15587/2025
(Writ Petition 15587/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Homayun Kabir and others versus Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Senior Secretary, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka-1000 and others |
Disposed of |
|
16 |
Writ Petition 14769/2018
(Writ Petition 14769/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Hosneara Begum Wife of the late Professor Rafiqul Islam House No. 5/11, Block-B, Humayun Road, Mohammadpur, Dhaka versus Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka-1000 and others |
Discharged |
|
17 |
Death Reference 38/2018
(Death Reference 38/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
The State -Versus- Md. Nayem @ Mohiuddin Nayem |
Rejected |
|
18 |
Death Reference 68/2018
(Death Reference 68/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
The State -Versus- Parvez Alam Sumon and another |
Rejected |
|
19 |
Death Reference 39/2018
(Death Reference 39/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
The State -Versus- Md. Nazmul (absconding) and others |
Rejected |
|
20 |
Civil Rule 166/2015
(.../)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Government of Bangladesh and others. Vs. Khulna Divisional Ship owners Groups, Khulna. |
The effect of section 28A of the Arpita Sampatti Protyarpan Ain, 2001, therefore, is that a property included in the Kha Schedule on the Gazette loses its character as vested property and is deemed never to have been included in the vested-property list. However, such cancellation does not, by itself, confer title upon any private claimant; the title, possession or other rights in respect of the property may still be determined in accordance with the prevailing law. The provision also preserves the right of the Government or any person to seek an appropriate remedy under the prevailing law in respect of any right, title or interest in the property. |
|
21 |
Death Reference 67/2019
(Death Reference 67/2019)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
The State .... petitioner -Versus- Liton Mondal (absconding) .... condemned-convict |
Accordingly, the reference is rejected. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Tribunal is hereby set aside. The condemned-convict is acquitted of the charges leveled against him. The warrant of arrest, if any shall be recalled. |
|
22 |
Death Reference 98/2019
(Death Reference 98/2019)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
The State .... petitioner -Versus- Md. Nur Islam .... condemned-prisoner |
Consequently, the reference is accepted. The sentence of death imposed by the Tribunal is hereby upheld. The criminal appeal is, therefore, dismissed and the jail appeal is accordingly disposed of. |
|
23 |
Criminal Revision (TN) 2903/2022
(Criminal Revision)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 25-AUG-26
|
Md. Dulal Hosen -vs- The State and another |
Disposed of |
|
24 |
First Appeal 213/2011
(First Appeal 213/2011)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 24-AUG-26
|
Md. Shahjahan Sardar being dead his heirs and successors- Mahfuza Begum and others -Versus- Sree Sree Laxmi Narayan Guak Thakur and others |
The First Appeal is dismissed. |
|
25 |
Civil Revision 6412/2023
(Civil Revision 6412/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 24-AUG-26
|
Most. Ayesha Bibi and others Vs. Md. Selim Shikder and others |
The Rule is hereby discharged. |
|
26 |
Writ Petition 18514/2025
(Writ Petition 18514/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 24-AUG-26
|
Md. Nurul Amin and others-Vs-Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Secondary and Higher Education Division, Ministry of Education and others |
Disposed of |
|
27 |
Writ Petition 9506/2019
(Writ Petition 9506/2019)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 23-AUG-26
|
Mohammed Idris, son of late Nur Ahmmad, House No. 66/A-2 (Western side of the First Floor), Road No. 03, Nasirabad Housing Society, Chattogram versus The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka-1000 and others |
Disposed of |
|
28 |
Civil Revision 2416/2018
(Civil Revision No. 2416 of 2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 23-AUG-26
|
Md. Ibrahim Nurunnabi Helal and another ... defendant-Petitioners Versus Md. Abul Hossain and others …Plaintiff-Opposite Parties |
Disposed of |
|
29 |
Civil Revision 987/2020
(Civil Revision 987/2020)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 23-AUG-26
|
Binod Kumar Mali and others ...... Defendant-Petitioners Versus Golam Faruk Khan Kaiser ...... Plaintiff-Opposite party |
Discharged |
|
30 |
Civil Revision 955/2025
(Civil Revision No. 955 of 2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 23-AUG-26
|
Md. Abul Kalam Azad … Petitioner Versus Mohsin Ali and another ... Opposite parties |
Discharged |
|
31 |
First Appeal 300/2007
(First Appeal 300/2007)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 24-AUG-26
|
A.K.M. Fazlul Haque and others ... Plaintiff-Appellants -Versus- Secretary, Baitul Aman Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and others ... Defendant-Respondents |
Disposed of |
|
32 |
First Appeal 399/2011
(First Appeal 399/2011)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Most. Malek Rahman and others Vs. Alhaj Mohammad Monjurul Alam set and others. |
The First Appeal is allowed. |
|
33 |
Criminal Revision (TN) 4407/2022
(Criminal Revision)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Happy -vs- The State and another |
Absolute |
|
34 |
Civil Revision 2253/2012
(Civil Revision 2253/2012)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Md. Nurul Haque and others Vs Md. Shamsuddin Mondol and others |
Absolute |
|
35 |
Civil Revision 2712/2001
(Civil Revision 2712/2001)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Abdul Khaleque Chowdhury Vs Cox`s bazar pourashava, represented by its Chairman and others |
Discharged |
|
36 |
Civil Revision 2968/2014
(Civil Revision 2968/2014)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Shahida Akhter and others Vs Md. Mokaruzzaman and others |
Absolute |
|
37 |
Civil Revision 4125/2014
(Civil Revision 4125/2014)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Nasrin Begum and others Vs Md. Kamal sarkar and others |
Absolute |
|
38 |
Civil Revision 118/2023
(Civil Revision 118/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Md. Sheikh Nazrul Islam (Saheb) Vs Halima Khatun |
Discharged |
|
39 |
Civil Revision 2867/2023
(Civil Revision 2867/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Sirajganj Vs Begum Sufia and others |
Discharged |
|
40 |
Civil Revision 3025/2013
(Civil Revision 3025/2013)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Mossammat Khadiza Begum Vs Md. Hochain Ali Howlader and others |
Discharged |
|
41 |
Civil Revision 3500/2024
(Civil Revision 3500/2024)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
The Mayor, Chalna Paurasava, Khulna Vs Mst. Romisa Begum and others |
Absolute |
|
42 |
Civil Revision 3196/2024
(Civil Revision 3196/2024)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Amena Khatun Popy and another Vs Sheikh Nasim Uddin and others |
Absolute |
|
43 |
Civil Revision 1042/2023
(Civil Revision 1042/2023)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Md. Mojnu Mridha Vs Mosammat Surutjan Bibi and others |
Discharged |
|
44 |
Civil Revision 928/2018
(Civil Revision 928/2018)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Nitai Chandra Roy and others Vs Vanu Chandra Sarker and others |
Discharged |
|
45 |
Civil Revision 940/2020
(Civil Revision 940/2020)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Madhob Kumar Das @ Khokan Vs Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Chuadanga and others |
Discharged |
|
46 |
Civil Revision 3058/2015
(Civil Revision 3058/2015)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Jahanara Bibi and others Vs Abdul Hamid and others |
Discharged |
|
47 |
Civil Revision 1803/2025
(Civil Revision 1803/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Most. Sanowara Begum Vs Sirajul Karim @ Bablu died leaving behind his heirs Md. Abdul Halim Sarkar (Roney) and others |
Discharged |
|
48 |
Company Matter 1965/2025
(Company Matter 1965/2025)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Mukta Rani Ghosh. -VERSUS- Purobi Jewellers (Pvt.) Ltd. and others |
The jurisdiction conferred upon the Company Court under section 43 of the Companies Act, 1994 is a special statutory jurisdiction vested exclusively in the Court by the Act. Such jurisdiction cannot be excluded, curtailed or suspended by an arbitration agreement contained in the Articles of Association or by the unilateral commencement of arbitral proceedings. Although section 227 recognises the right of the parties to refer an arbitrable dispute to arbitration, it is essentially an enabling provision and does not divest the Company Court of the statutory jurisdiction expressly conferred upon it under section 43. An arbitral tribunal derives its jurisdiction from the agreement of the parties, whereas the power to rectify the register of members is a statutory power conferred by the Companies Act and is exercisable by the Company Court. |
|
49 |
Civil Revision 1561/1998
(Civil Revision 1561/1998)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Mohendra Nath Ghorami and others Vs Nalini Kanta Biswas and others |
Absolute |
|
50 |
Civil Revision 252/2022
(Civil Revision 252/2022)
অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 20-AUG-26
|
Soyedur Rahman Shaodagor Waqf Estate and another Vs Mosammot Jesmin Akter and others |
Absolute |
