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

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Ali Haider Ratan and another, -Versus - Khudeja Bhumukhi Farm Ltd., and others.
The materials on record disclose that respondent No. 3 admittedly executed a Power of Attorney before the Bangladesh Consulate in London on 19.10.2010 authorising respondent No. 2 to deal with matters relating to the Company, including her shareholding. Significantly, respondent No. 3 herself has produced before this Court a subsequent deed purporting to revoke the said Power of Attorney. In the ordinary course of law, a revocation necessarily presupposes the existence of a valid authority. Thus, the very reliance placed by respondent No. 3 upon the deed of revocation constitutes an admission that such authority had indeed been created.
2
South Express Limited. -Versus- Madina Enterprise and another
This court is of the view that since the respondents admittedly received notice of the arbitral proceedings, failed to appoint their arbitrator within the stipulated time, participated through solicitors without challenging the tribunal`s jurisdiction before the competent English court, and since no ground under section 46 of the Arbitration Act, 2001 was established, the learned District Judge exceeded his jurisdiction by reappraising the merits of the award, holding that the arbitrator committed errors of fact and law, and purporting to set aside the foreign arbitral award. The impugned order, therefore, cannot be sustained and the Award is entitled to recognition and enforcement under section 45 of the Arbitration Act, 2001.
3
Sree Ranjit Kumar Mondal and others Vs Mst. Joygun Nesa and others
It is a settled principle of law that, in a probate proceeding, the Court is not competent to determine questions relating to the title or ownership of the property bequeathed under a Will. The sole enquiry in such proceedings is whether the testator duly executed the Will and whether it represents his last Will and testament. It is equally well settled that the grant of probate establishes only the due execution, genuineness and operative character of the Will. It neither invalidates any subsequent transfer nor declares that the beneficiaries under the Will have acquired a better title to the property. However, a subsequent purchaser may oppose the grant of probate only on grounds relating to the genuineness or validity of the Will, such as by alleging that the Will is forged or fabricated, was not duly executed or attested in accordance with law, that the testatrix lacked testamentary capacity, or that its execution was surrounded by suspicious circumstances. But, such a purchaser cannot invite the probate Court to adjudicate questions of title or to declare that his or her sale deed conveys a better title than that of the beneficiaries under the Will, because such issues lie beyond the limited jurisdiction of a probate Court.
4
Jogesh Chandra Roy Memorial Trust, represented by its Chairman, Alhaj Aktaruzzaman Chowdhury vs The Government of The People’s Republic of Bangladesh
Discharged
5
Kumudini Welfare Trust of Bengal (BD) Ltd. vs. Pubali Bank Limited and another
Rule Discharged
6
Sadrul Hasan, son of Aiyub, Proprietor, S2 Imports of House No. 61/B, Flat-5/B, Road-6/A, Dhanmondi R/A, Post Office-Jigatola-1209, Police Station-Dhanmondi, Dhaka and others. … Petitioners -Versus- The Commissioner of Taxes, Income Tax Intelligence and Investigation Unit, National Board of Revenue, Dak Bhaban (11th floor), Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Agargaon, Dhaka-1207 … Respondent
Absolute
7
Md. Enamul Haque ... Convict-Appellant -Versus- The State and another ...Complainant-Respondents
The appeal is disposed of
8
Discharged
9
Md. Mahtab Uddin and another ...Petitioners -Versus- Executive Engineer, Sales
Discharged
10
Shafiul Islam ........ Defendant-appellant-petitioner -Versus- Sree Provat Chandra Barman and others ....... Plaintiff-respondent-opposite parties
Rule Absolute
11
Md. Saiful Rahman Mondol @ Bablu ... Appellant -Versus- The State and another ... Respondents
The appeal is dismissed
12
Sarder Moin Uddin and others Vs. The People`s Republic of Bangladesh and others
.
13
Md. Iqbal Al-Faruk ... Convict-Appellant-Petitioner -Versus- The State and another ...Complainant-Respondent-Opposite Parties
The Rule is disposed of
14
Nipesh Chandra Mondol -versus- The State and another
Discharged
15
Md. Solaiman -Versus- Md. Elias Mollik and others
The Rule is disposed of.
16
Unique Construction (PVt.) Limited Vs. Project Manager Chandana-Barasia River Excavation Project and another
Allowed
17
Selim Khan Vs. Mst. Aklima Khatun and another
.
18
Md. Abul Kalam Vs. Md. Kawsar Amir Ali
Discharged
19
Md. Masud Alam ... Appellant -Versus- The State and another ... Respondents
The Criminal Appeal is dismissed
20
SVC Jhilmil Residential BD Limited . -Versus- Rajdhani Unnayan Kartipakkha (RAJUK), represented by its Chairman, RAJUK Bhaban, RAJUK Avenue, Dhaka 1000 and others.
Differing, with the greatest respect, from the larger bench decision in Accom, this court is unable to subscribe to the reasoning adopted therein. In the considered view of this court, sections 7, 7A and 10 of the Arbitration Act, 2001 are capable of operating in aid of arbitral proceedings even where the juridical seat of arbitration is outside Bangladesh. Properly construed, these provisions are intended to facilitate and support the arbitral process by conferring limited judicial assistance, rather than by exercising supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitral proceedings themselves. Consequently, the invocation of section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in place of section 10 of the Arbitration Act, 2001, as adopted in Accom, appears both unnecessary and unwarranted.
21
Md. Aminul Islam -versus- The State and another
Dismissed
22
Md. Al-Amin alias Uzzal Vs Shaheen Parvin and others
Neither the Transfer of Property Act nor the Contract Act contains any specific provision as to whether a person with an intellectual disability (বুদ্ধি প্রতিবন্ধী) is competent to contract or to transfer property. The competency of such a person must, therefore, be determined in the light of the general principles embodied in Sections 11 and 12 of the Contract Act, namely, whether, at the time of entering into the transaction, the person was capable of understanding its nature and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his or her interests.
23
Mohammad Akteruzzaman versus The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka-1000 and others
Discharged
24
Mirza Md. Mosharraf Hossain versus Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law, justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Bangladesh Secretariat, Romna, Dhaka and others
Disposed of
25
1. Md. Salim Shaikh 2. Md. Musfikul Islam Shikdar versus Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operative, Local Government Division, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others
Disposed of
26
Md. Shahinur Islam and others versus People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Education, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others
Absolute
27
Shah Fatheullah Forging Mill Ltd. and another versus Chairman, Dhaka Electric Supply Authority, Abdul Goni Road, Dhaka, and others
Discharged
28
A. A. M. Jakaria versus Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Bangladesh Secretariat, Shahbag, Dhaka-1000 and others
Discharged
29
Mahmuda Khatun and another versus Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka, and others
Absolute
30
Rubayet Hossain versus Bangladesh Bank, represented by its Governor, Bangladesh Bank Building, Motijheel Commercial Area, Dhaka-1000, and others
Disposed of
31
Md. Shahidur Rahman Vs. Monjurul Huq and others
Appeal is allowed remanding the suit to the trial Court.
32
Md. Rezuwan Dewan Vs. Md. Iman Ali and others
.
33
Md. Didrul Alam Chowdhury vs. The state and another
Discharged
34
The State ..... petitioner -Versus- Akash alias Mithu ..... condemned-prisoner
Consequently, the death reference is rejected. The criminal appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of conviction passed by the Tribunal under section 11(Ka) of the Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan Ain, 2000 against the condemned-prisoner is hereby converted to one under section 302 of the Penal Code and his sentence of death is commuted to imprisonment for life with a fine of Taka 10,000/-, failing to pay the fine he shall suffer imprisonment for 03(three) months more. The jail appeal is accordingly disposed of.
35
Mohammad Rashid and another -Vs- The State
The rule of law that the evidence of one party should not be received as evidence against another party without the latter having an opportunity of testing it by cross-examination.

In the absence of a chemical examination report under Section 50 of the Madok Drobbo Niyantran Ain, 1990, it cannot be said that the alleged Yaba Tablets or any ingredient of narcotics contained any ingredient of amphetamine or narcotics.

The doubtful and suspect nature of the evidence sought to be relied upon to substantiate the circumstances suffered from serious infirmities and lacked legal credibility.
36
Popy Banarjee, Advocate, District Bar Association, Khulna-Vs-The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Security Service Division, Ministry of Home Affairs and others
Absolute
37
Abdul Aziz Vs. Unidev Trading (BD) Limited and others
.
38
মোঃ মাছুম বিল্লাল - বনাম- রাষ্ট্র গং
The assessment of valuation made by the Income Tax Department has legal validity which should not be quostioned by another independent government department.
39
Bangladesh Textile Mills Association (BTMA). -Versus- Chan Chao International Co. Ltd. and others.
Arbitration Appllication Nos. 36/2025 and 44/2025 -dismissed; Arbitration Application No. 45/2025 -Allowed.
40
Md. Abdul Baset ...Convict-Appellant -Versus- The State and another ...Respondent
The appeal is allowed
41
The State ...petitioner -Versus- Md. Nuruzzaman ...condemned-prisoner
In the result, we hold that the reference is liable to be rejected and accordingly, it is rejected. The appeals filed by the condemned prisoner and other two convicts are allowed and the Jail Appeal is accordingly disposed of.
42
Ala Uddin and others Vs. Government
The learned cognizance Magistrate concerned is however directed to hear on the naraji application, afresh and then hold a further inquiry in the case under section 202 of the Cr.P.C. on the allegation made in the naraji about to discover the truthness and falsehood of the allegation as made and then if so the case stand under section 302 of the Penal Code, shall send the record towards the Court of Sessions for taking cognizance and also for holding trial thereto.
43
The State ...petitioner -Versus- Md. Nuruzzaman ...condemned-prisoner
So, it can be safely concluded that the deceased committed suicide at the house of the accused persons. Therefore, we hold that the condemned prisoner is under no more obligation to explain, how his wife died at his house. Such being the case, we hold that the learned Judge of the Tribunal has awarded sentence upon the accused persons misreading the evidence on record and, therefore, reached in such an erroneous decisions regarding conviction and sentence of the accused persons. In the result, we hold that the reference is liable to be rejected and accordingly, it is rejected. The appeals filed by the condemned prisoner and other two convicts are allowed and the Jail Appeal is accordingly disposed of. Let the condemned prisoner be set at liberty if not wanted in connection with any other case. The other convict-appellants and their sureties are discharged from respective bail bonds.
44
The State ...petitioner -Versus- Subir Kumar Roy alias Babu and 3 others ...condemned-convicts (Absconding)
Accordingly, the reference is accepted in part so far it relates to condemned-convict Subir Kumar Roy. The death penalty awarded upon convict Subir Kuar Roy by the Judge, Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Tribunal-1, Sirajganj is hereby confirmed and upheld. Convicts Dr. Sushil Kumar Roy, Sunil Kumar Roy and Monaranjon Roy are found not guilty of the charges leveled against them under sections 11(Ka) and 30 of the Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 and, therefore, they are acquitted of the same. Let the conviction warrant or warrant of arrest issued against Dr. Sushil Kumar Roy, Sunil Kumar Roy and Monaranjon Roy be recalled.
45
The State ..... petitioner -Versus- Md. Abdullah ..... condemned-prisoner
In view of the discussion made hereinabove, we find no legal evidence against the condemned-prisoner to sustain the conviction. Accordingly, the reference is rejected. The Rule issued in Criminal Miscellaneous Case 40470 of 2022 is hereby made absolute. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judge of the Tribunal convicting the condemned-prisoner under section 11(Ka) of the Ain, 2000 and sentencing him thereunder to death is hereby set aside. The condemned-prisoner is acquitted of the charge levelled against him.
46
Dayem Khandker... Petitioner and The Governemnt and others
Habeas Corpus matter
47
Mohammad Quyaum and another. -Versus- National Drug Co. Limited and others.
Allowed in part.
48
Bangladesh Finance Limited (formerly known as BD Finance Limited) of 27 Dilkusha Commercial Area, Motijheel, Dhaka and others vs Government of the People of Bangladesh
BD finance Limited Judgment against show cause
49
Md. Salah Uddin vs The Government of Bangladesh
Discharged
50
Md. Afsor Uddin VS The Government of The People’s Republic of Bangladesh
Discharged
This Site is Visited :