Judgment : High Court Division
(If you feel problem with font, please, download Bangla font from Downloads Link)
 
Case Category : 
Case Type
Case Number
Year
Parties
Short Description
 

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
The Committee for protection of Monthan Pond, represented by its Member Palash Kantinag Versus The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Segun Bagicha, Dhaka-1000 and others
2
Manoj Kumar Mandol Versus Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law Justice
3
Sheikh Mohmmad Zafor alias Abu Zafor and another Versus Samela Bibi being dead his heirs Sheikh Md. Siddiqur Rahman and another
4
Md. Sabuz Miah @ Md. Mohsin Hossain Versus Most. Rahela Akter
5
Md. Nur-E-Helal VS Bangladesh, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Education
6
Sahida Akter Rani Versus 1(ka) Mst. Joynob Bibi and others
7
Md. Abdul Munim Vs. Election Commission of Bangladesh, represented by the Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election Commission Secretariat, Sher-E-Banglanagor, Agargaon, Dhaka and others.
Bangladesh Election Commission
8
Tania Rahman, wife of Md. Mujibur Rahman of House No. 5, Road No. 3, Block-B, Dumni, Pink City, Khilkhet, Dhaka. Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works and others.
9
Babul Howlader -Versus- Mokbul Hossain and another
10
Abdul Maleque -Versus- Md. Riazuddin and others
11
Md. Shah Jalal Khan and another -Versus- Jalal Mir and others
12
Alekjan Bibi and others -Versus- Jabeda Bibi and others
13
Md. Hafizur Rahman alias Bazu Mia -Versus- Rawsanara Begum and others
14
Md. Whahed Ali and others - Versus- Most. Rahima Khatun and others
15
Abdul Kuddus Bepari and others -Versus- BinNarayan Chandra Dutta
16
Md. Aslam Miah Vs. Mrs. Morzina Begum and another
17
Syed Jihad Ali and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others.
18
Md. Ansar Ali and another Versus Md. Mahbur Rahman and others
19
Chandana Rani Sarkar Versus Protap Chandra Sarkar and anothers
20
Md. Abdus Sobhan Versus Md. Arfanullah and others
21
Dilip Kumar Khashkel being died his heirs 1(a) Kalpona Rani Khaskel and others Vs Ranu Bala Khashkel and others .
22
Md. Shamsul Haque Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Liberation War Affairs and others.
23
Alhaj M.A. Bari Khan Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Shipping others.
24
Md. Mahmudul Hasan Versus Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs and others.
Nikah Registrar
25
Nurul Kabir Vs. Sodaha Ludhi Shikdarpara Jame Masjid and others
There is no provision in the Waqfs Ordinance, 1962 prohibiting ‘a person interested in the waqf,’ as defined in section 2(8) of the Ordinance, or ‘the waqf estate itself,’ as the case may be, to establish the right, title and interest of the waqf by filing a suit or proceeding in a Court in the event of failure on the part of the Administrator of Waqfs or mutrawalli in taking necessary steps under sections 6A, 56 or 83 of the Ordinance to protect the interest of the waqf.

Accordingly, I am of the view that, being a person interested in the waqf, the Vice-president of the mosque Committee has locus standi to institute the suit representing the waqf estate for protection of its interest.
26
Pruesiau Aug Marma and another Versus Aungmra Shang Marma and another
Chittagong Hill Tracts
27
Executive Engineer, Roads and Highway Department, Tangail and others Vs. Abdul Karim being dead his heirs Md. Atikur Rahman and others
28
Abul Kasem and another Vs. Mrs. Ummul Hasnat Mahmud Ahmed being dead his heirs Asfaque Ahmed and another
It appears that the whole proceeding in regards execution and registration of the deed in question and endorsement of the Sub-Registrar therein as provided under sections 31, 32, 34, 35, 52, 58, 59 and 60 of the Registration Act, as stated above, were done in accordance with those provisions of the Act and the document achieved strong presumptive evidence as to its due registration. Accordingly, burden was upon the plaintiffs to rebut such evidence by adducing strong evidence to prove that the deed in question was a product of forgery. But the plaintiffs failed to discharge the onus.
29
The State VS Etua Mura
It is well settled that in order to prove a criminal offence the prosecution has to prove the place of occurrence, date and time of the occurrence and the manner of the occurrence and more importantly connect the accused person with the commission of the offence by legal evidence and beyond reasonable doubt.
30
Md. Saiful Islam and others Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Education and others.
31
Alauddin and others VS Sree Narayan Chandra Shil being dead his heirs: 1(a) Keshob Chandra Shil and others
The interest in the estate of the testator within the words of Section 283 of Succession Act means an interest through the testator. A person who claims outside or independently of the will or claims adversely to the testator and disputes his right to deal with the property cannot be deemed to claim any interest in the estate of the deceased. The crucial point in this case is whether the appellant claimed any interest in the estate through the testator and since they do not and cannot do so they had no locus standi to be added as a party or question the execution or attestation of the will in this probate proceeding.
....
From a combined reading of sections 283(1)(c) and 63(c) of the Succession Act, it appears that the party who wants to assail a will relying on section 63(c) must at first satisfy the requirement of section 283(1)(c) that the attacking party-caveator coming under section 284 must be a party claiming interest in the estate through testator and if such party claims independently of the will cannot be said to have interest in the probate case.
....
Without the guarantee of fundamental human rights and the rule of law no nation can attain perfection. Justice is established when the idea that what is injurious to others is injurious to oneself comes to the mind of the people of the society. When there is inequality in the society, people move away from the concept of morality and treat the weak with injustice. It disrupts social behavior and state principles. This kind of injustice can be removed from the society through well thought out and specific application of law. The technicalities of the law should be used sparingly with caution keeping in mind that justice shall not come undone.
32
Mrs. Rabeya Khatun and others Versus Mrs. Taslima Hasa
33
Md. Waliul Islam and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others.
34
Md. Al-Amin Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Public Administration and others
35
Mohammad Ali vs The State and others
36
Muhammad Mahmudur Rahman and others Versus The Government of Bangladesh and others.
NTRCA
37
K.M. Khaled Versus Bangladesh Securities and Exchange Commission
38
Md. Delowar Hossain Versus Bangladesh Election Commision, represented by the Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election Commission and others.
39
Md. Nazrul Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.
ইউনিয়ন তথ্য সেবা কেন্দ্র
40
Muzahidul Islam Arif Versus Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.
41
Abdus Salam Talukder and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others
42
Jubair Ahmmed B.Sc Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.
43
Md. Mostafijur Rahman Versus The Government of Bangladesh and others
44
Md. Jahidul Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.
45
Md. Rokib Uddin Mondol alias Md. Raquib Uddin Mondol, Index No. 230238, Headmaster(Retired) Banglahili Pilot School and College Hakimpur, Dinajpur. Versus Govt. of Bangladesh and others
46
Md. Rafiqul Islam Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and Others
47
Md. Khalilur Rahman and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others.
48
Md. Rezaul Karim, Headmaster, Kapasia Technical School (53095) Vs. The Secretary, Ministry of Education Technical and Madrasha Education Department, Secretariate Link Road, Poribohanpol Bhaban, Dhaka and others.
49
Mohammad Hamidul Hoque Versus The Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Local Government Division, Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives, Bangladesh Secretariat, Police Station-Ramna, District-Dhaka-1000 and others.
50
Mr. Abdul Bashar Mollah Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others
এই সাইটটি প্রদর্শিত হয়েছে :