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

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Abdul Malek and others Vs. Joynal Abedin and others
2
Md. Sultan Mahmud Fakir Vs. Alhaj Md. Mokjhleesar Rahman Mollah and others.
Discharged
3
Mosammat Peyara Khatun
Absolute
4
Most. Firoza Begum … Plaintiff-Appellant. -VersusLimo Electronics Limited and others. …defendants-Respondents.
The appeal is dismissed
5
Mokles and others. vs Hazi Md. Rafiqul Islam and others.
Rule is discharged
6
7
8
9
Woodland Plywood and Particle Board Mills Limited versus National Board of Revenue and others
Absolute
10
Mrs. Zubaida Rahman Khan, wife of Mr. Tarique Rahman, of 6, Shahid Mainul Road, Dhaka Cantonment, Dhaka, at present House No.01, Road No.79, Gulshan-2, Dhaka -Versus- The State and another
11
H. M. Golam Reza, son of Alhaj Md. Sukur Ali at present- Road No. 159/8, Mirpur-10, District- Dhaka.-Vs-Erick Ershad, son of late Alhaj Hussain Mohammad Ershad permanent address- Polly Nibus, Post Dersona, Upazila- Rangpur Sadar, District- Rangpur, at present address: House No. 10, Dutabash Road, Baridhara Residential Area, Block- Ka, Police Station- Gulshan, District- Dhaka.
Dismissed and discharged
12
Md. Shafayet Alam vs Government of Bangladesh and others.
Third Wave Technologies Ltd., subsequently changed to Nagad Ltd. with permission of the Registrar, Joint Stock Companies and Firms, Bangladesh (Annexure-A), entered into an agreement with BPO on 14.12.2017 (Annexure-B) as the “Principal Agent” of Bangladesh Post Office for carrying out the respective works, as stated therein on a revenue sharing basis. However, vide Section 11 of the Act, 2024 payment system participant /payment systems operator/payment service provider i.e. BPO shall be held liable /accountable jointly for the actions of its “agent”.
In view of the irregularities/illegalities being found by the inspection team of Bangladesh Bank in the operation of “Nagad” service Bangladesh Bank issued show cause notice to the Bangladesh Post Office who launched “Nagad” service, under Section 31(2) and on receipt of its reply took steps under Section 31(1) with appointment of Administrator for “Nagad” service for the interest of users and other stakeholders being involved with the operation of the said service.
As such, the proposition of the petitioner as to issuance of show cause notice upon Nagad Ltd., an agent of Bangladesh Post Office under Section 31(1) of the Act, 2024 independent of BPO has no substance at all.
In view of the above, challenging the appointment of the Administrator of “Nagad” service of Bangladesh Post Office under Section 31(1) by the Director of Nagad Ltd., the company who is the “agent” of Bangladesh Post Office, under Article 102 of the Constitution is not maintainable for having no locus standi.
13
Mrinal Kanti Chatterjee being dead his legal heirs Shefali Chattaerjee and others vs. Sheikh Humayun Kabir and others
discharged
14
Md. Habib Fakir vs. Abdul Khaleq and others
disposed of
15
16
Samsun Nahar --- Plaintiff -Appellant. -Versus- Serajul Islam and others --- Defendants-Respondents.
The appeal is disposed of.
17
Rajdhani Unnyan Kartipakkha (RAJUK) represented by its Chairman, RAJUK Bhaban, Police Station- Motijheel, Dhaka-1000 and another.-Vs-
Dismissed
18
Mujibur Rahman and others vs. Jewel Khan and others
Discharged
19
Rajdhani Unnyan Kartipakkha (RAJUK) represented by its Chairman, RAJUK Bhaban, P.S. Motijheel, Dhaka-1000 and another.-Vs-Niloy International Proprietor- Abdul Marib Ahmed House No. 2, Road No. 11, Block-K, Bridhara Model Town, Dhaka. On its constituted Attorney (1) Md. Tofazzel Hossain Fakir, Assistant Manager, Legal cell Nitol Niloy Group, Dhaka and others.
Dismissed
20
Md. Abdur Razzaque and others. vs. Nazim Uddin being dead his heirs Md. Babul Rahman and others.
Disposed of
21
Md. Imam Hossain Vs. Habibullah Shikder and others
Absolute
22
Md. Moslem vs the state
23
Md. Ashraf Hossain (Bablu) Vs. Md. Mojaffar Hossain being dead his heirs Mosammat Nurjahan Khatun and others.
Discharged
24
Md. Mukul Bepari Vs. Mst. Nurjahan Begum
Discharged
25
Dilruba Islam Ruba Vs. Md. Touhidul Islam and others.
Discharged
26
Nikhil Chandra Biswas and another Vs. Shushil Biswas and others
Absolute
27
Md. Shariful Islam and others Vs. A.T.M. Jashimuddin being dead his heirs-MOnowara Begum and others
28
Most. Afroja Sultana versus
Allowed
29
Belait Hossain being dead his heirs- Afia Begum and Ayesha and others Vs. NIjam Guni and others
30
Ruhul Amin and others Vs. Md. Masud Ali Sheikh and others.
Absolute.
31
Executive Engineer, RHD Vs. The Rupsha Engineers Limited and others.
Discharged
32
Md. Hachen Ali Fakir being dead his heirs heiresses Mosammat Aleka Bewa and others
33
Md. Torab Ali being dead his legal heirs; 1(a) Surjaban Bibi and others-Vs-Md. Sharafat Ali
Discharged
34
Rattan Ali Howlader -vs- Afsar uddin Howlader and others.
Rule is discharged
35
Tahira Ahad versus Abu Sayed Sarwar alias Hasan Sarwar and others
Disposed of
36
Md. Rafiqul Islam Gazi
37
Md. Jahangir Hossain Vs. Nur Nahar Niha
38
Md. Khorshed Alom and others versus Zakir Hossain and others
Allowed
39
Md. Harunur Rashid Rana and others versus Md. Abdul Jabbar Miah and others
Allowed
40
Dr. Badiul Alam Majumdar and others and Md. Mofazzal Hossain (Freedom Fighter) vs Government of Bangladesh and others
In the light of the above observations and findings following decisions have been taken by this Court:
a) Act No. 14 of 2011, i.e. Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 2011 is found not void as a whole;
b) The repeal of Article 58A and Chapter IIA of the Constitution with regard to Non-Party Caretaker Government vide Sections 20 and 21 of the Act No.14 of 2011 has destroyed the basic structure of the Constitution, i.e. democracy; hence, those two sections are declared void being ultra vires the Constitution, with prospective effect;
c) With the repeal of referendum, as it was part of Article 142 of the Constitution vide Twelfth Amendment Act, 1991 has negated the will of the people to express their opinion on the amendability of the Preamble and Articles 8, 48 and 56 of the Constitution; hence, repealing the provision of referendum under Article 142 vide Section 42 of the Act No.14 of 2011 is declared void, being repugnant to and inconsistent with the basic structure of the Constitution. Consequently, Article 142 as it then was vide Twelfth Amendment Act, 1991 is hereby restored;
d) Incorporating Articles 7A and 7B after Article 7 of the Constitution is squarely contradictory to Article 7, guaranteeing the will of the people and the supremacy of the Constitution including the right of freedom of thought and conscious and of speech and expression. It also, has taken away the power of amendability of the successor Parliament. Hence, it is declared void and a nullity in the eye of the supreme law of the land, i.e. the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Consequently, Section 7 of the Act, 2011 incorporating Articles 7A and 7B after Article 7 of the Constitution is hereby declared void being ultra-vires the Constitution;
e) High Court Division is the creature of the Constitution with plenary power of judicial review over the impugned actions of the executive, even the legislature. It has the power to declare amendment of law void which touches the basic structure of the Constitution. Moreso, High Court Division is the guardian of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. The Legislature vide Article 44(2) has allowed said power of the High Court Division to be swallowed up by any other court, which is the product of statute. Thus, it comes in direct conflict with Article 102(1) read with Article 44(1) of the Constitution.
Accordingly, Section 18 of the Act No.14 of 2011 so far it relates to incorporation of Article 44(2) is hereby declared as void, non-est and a nullity having altered the basic structure of the Constitution; and
f) Except Article 58A and Chapter IIA, Article 142 so far it relates to repeal of referendum, Articles 7A and 7B and Article 44(2) of the Constitution, the legality and propriety of all other impugned Sections of the Act No.14 of 2011, i.e. the Constitution ( Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 2011 vide which respective Articles of the Constitution including its Preamble have been amended by the Parliament by way of insertion, modification, substitution, repeal etc., are left to be looked into/decided by the successor Parliament in accordance with law.
41
Md. Ala Boxh Khan, being dead, his legal heirs: Mst. Rahela Begum @ Raihela Begum @ Rahela Bewa and others -Vs- Md. Mojnur Rahman
It manifests from the above provisions that an ex parte judgment and decree can be set aside on two grounds: (I) that the summons was not duly served or (II) that any sufficient cause prevented him from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing.
42
Farid Hasan Mahadi and others versus Government of the People`s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka-1000 and others
Absolute
43
Rana Miah -Versus- The State and another
44
Shamsunnahar and others-Vs-Nurul Alam and others
Absolute in part
45
Md. Imran Ali Vs. Anuara Begum
Discharged
46
Monjil Housing and Developer Limited, House No. 61, Road No. 18, Sector-7, Uttara, Dhaka represented by the Managing Director Md. Zahirul Alam Chowdhury.-Vs-Mst. Kohinur Begum, wife of Md. Esob Khan and others
Dismissed
47
Md. Shawkat Ali alias Shawkat Mia and another Vs. Land Survey Tribunal, Tangail and others
Rule Nisi is disposed of.
48
Md. Yashin and others. … Defendant -Appellants -VersusSayedul Haque @ Murad Hossain and others. …Plaintiffs-Respondents
The appeal is disposed
49
Mosammat Anwara Begum being dead her heirs 1(a) Khandoker Jakir Hossain and others. … Defendant nos. 5 and 6-Appellants. -VersusMd. Mohosin Dewan and others. …Plaintiffs-Respondents
The appeal is allowed
50
Dhaka Wasa Karmachari Bahmuki Samabaya Samity Limited Vs. Dhaka WASA
This Site is Visited :