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

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Syed Ziad Rahman, son of late Sayed Habibur Rahman and late Anwara Begum of 24/25, Mohammad Ali Road (ICI Banglo), Bloosm Garden, CDA Avenue, Dampara, Chittagong City Corporation, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Chittagong.-Vs-Chittagong Development Authority (CDA) represented by its Chairman, CDA Bhaban, Chittagong and others.
Absolute
2
Sonjoy Kumar Saha Vs. Sonali Biri Factory (Pvt.) Limited and others.
Dismissed.
3
Masood R. Sobhan for the petitioner (in person) vs Bangladesh Bank and others.
It is the categorical findings of our Appellate Division that exercise of discretion by the High Court Division to treat the petitioner aggrieved or not depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Accordingly, this Court can grant locus standi to the petitioner to maintain the writ petition for judicial redress of public injury arising from breach of public duty or for violation of the respective provisions of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of such public duty and or observance of such constitutional or legal provision. No doubt, instant writ petition does not reflect strict compliance with the respective provisions of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973, but when an issue is brought to the judicial notice of this Court, the guardian of the Constitution, by filing writ petition under Article 102 of the Constitution involving public cause, which ultimately led to disclosure of public wrong or public injury, the same cannot be throttled down on the ground that the petition suffers from procedural defect or is not in form. In other words, this writ petition maintains/survives in the eye of law considering the given facts and circumstances of the instant case. Generally, question of appointment of the Receiver comes into play for preservation of the subject matter of the litigation pending judicial determination of the rights of the parties concerned. However, in the instant case, the appointment of the Receiver by the respondent no.1 pursuant to the interim order of this Court, has not been made within the framework of the respective statute, rules, regulations or circulars of Bangladesh Bank. Said interim order has been passed by this Court considering the exigency of the present context of the respective companies of Beximco Group which involves huge outstanding loan of Tk.53,100 crore, sanctioned by different scheduled banks and financial institutions and Tk. 23,120.51 crore being classified as of 30.09.2024. Thus, posing significant threat to recovery of the said public fund.In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, appointing a receiver by Bangladesh Bank pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court and having not been interfered with by the Hon’ble Appellate Division, is found lawful under the doctrine of necessity as embodied in the maxim, salus populi est suprema lex (public welfare is the hightest law).
4
Securities Exchange Commission vs. Government of Bangladesh and others
5
Abdul Motakeb and others Vs. The Government of the People`s Republic of Bangladesh and others
Disposed of
6
Mohammad Mozaharull Islam Chowdhury and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh
Discharged
7
Swpan Kumar Saha and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh
Disposed of
8
Santosh Kumar Mistry Vs. The Land Survey Tribunal, Pirojpur
Disposed of
9
The Deputy Commissioner, Nilphamari Vs. The Government of People`s Republic of Bangladesh
Disposed of
10
Barishal Palli Bidyut Samity-1 -Vs. The 3rd Labour Court, Dhaka
Disposed of
11
Prime Islami Life3 Insurance Ltd. Vs. Sterling Creations Limited and others
Dismissed
12
Md. Abdul Latif … Petitioner -VersusDeputy Commissioner, Khulna and another … Respondents
Absolute
13
Md. Khairul Islam Lebu. -Versus- Mrs. Rupali Akter Rupa and another
Discharged
14
Rahul Narayan Boshak ... Petitioner. -Vs- Amarendra Narayan Boshak alias Amar Mitro and others …Opposite Parties.
The Rule is made absolute
15
Md. Azad Miah and others ... Appellants -Petitioners -Versus- Rahmat Ullah and others ... Respondents-Opposite parties
The Rule is made absolute.
16
Channel VAS Holding Limited Vs. The Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms and others.
Allowed.
17
Md. Shameem Ahsan and others Vs. One-way Textile Limited and others.
The application for dismissal of the winding up petition is disposed of.
18
Biddut Kumar Karmakar and another versus Joydeb Karmakar and others
Dismissed
19
Mongla Port Authority, represented by the Chairman, Mongla Port Authority, P.S.-Mongla, District-Bagerhat, its Branch Office, Khalishpur, P.S.-Daulatpur, District-Khulna versus M/S. Mashreki Traders Ltd., represented by its Managing Director, 64, Motijheel C/A, Dhaka, and another
Dismissed
20
Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Food, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka versus Md. Kamal Uddin being dead, his heirs and legal representatives are: Most. Hamida Khatun and others
Dismissed
21
Agrani Bank Limited versus N Rahmania Banaspati
Allowed
22
Plastic Touch Industries Ltd.-Versus- The Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms (RJSC) and another
Allowed
23
Chowdhury Md. Humayun Kabir and others Vs. The Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms and others.
disposed of
24
Advocate Md. Bashir Ullah vs. Khorshed Alam and others
Discharged
25
Md. Fazle Morhal and another. ------ Defendants-Appellants-Petitioners.-Versus- Ad. Alhaj Md. Nawsher Ali being dead his legal heirs: 1(a) Md. Mehedi Hasan and others
26
Emdadul Haque (Shamrat Kabir) -Versus- Md. Abdur Rahim
Discharged
27
Pulindra Mozumder … Petitioner -VersusJudge, Arpita Sampatti Prottarpan Additional Appellate Tribunal No. 5 and Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Sylhet and others … Respondents
Discharged.
28
Pure Cotton Limited Vs. The Perfect Fit Co. Limited and others.
Dismissed
29
M
Allowed.
30
Banglalink Digital Communications Ltd. Vs. Bestec Telecom Ltd. and others.
Allowed
31
Robi Axiata Ltd. Vs. Apple GlobalTel Communications Ltd. and others.
Allowed.
32
Monjasa Pte. Ltd. -VERSUS- M.V. TAN BINH 45, (IMO No. 9140229, Flag: Panama) and others.
33
Seven Circle (Bangladesh) Limited ........ Transferee-Petitioner. 2. Shun Shing Power Limited....... Transferor-Petitioner -Versus- The Registrar, Joint Stock Companies and Firms. TCB Bhaban, Kawran Bazar, Dhaka
Allowed
34
Begum Khaja Eliza Yeasmin and another. -Versus- Howa Begum and others.
Absolute
35
Md. Roficul Islam @ Md. Rofujul Islam and others. -Versus- Md. Solayman Ali
Discharged
36
Kazi Atiqur Rahman. -Versus- Kazi Nasirul Alam and others
Disposed of
37
Md. Taffazal Karim, -Versus- Regional Manager, Bangladesh House Building Finance Corporation, Kushtia
Dismissed
38
Shree Kitopod Sardar @ Sarkar and others. -Versus- Md. Soleman Sarder and others
Discharged
39
Khondkar Rifat Hossain Vs. Jahan Ara Clinic Limited and others.
Dismissed.
40
Barishal Palli Bidyut Samity-1 -vs- The 3rd Labour Court, Dhaka
Disposed of.
41
Barishal Palli Bidyut Samity-1
Disposed of.
42
43
44
45
46
Md Obaidur Rahman -Versus- The State
47
Md. Shafiqul Islam -Versus- The State and another
48
Md. Delowar Hossain alias Saijul Islam and others. -Versus- Md. Kalam Mollah and others
Discharged
49
Md. Sarwar Mirza and another -Vs- Sajedul Alam and Government of Bangladesh
When time is not originally made of the essence of a contract for sale of land, one of the parties is not entitled afterwards by notice to make it of the essence, unless there has been some default or unreasonable delay by the other party.
50
Asma Akhter Khanom and another -Vs- Mst. Khaleda Akhter Khanom and others
This Site is Visited :