| Serial No. |
Issue |
Year |
Name of
the Parties/Case No and Citation |
Key Word(s) |
Short Ratio |
| 1. |
3 |
2015 |
Criminal Appeal No. 54 of 2007
3 SCOB [2015] AD 1 |
Breach of contract; Offence of cheating; Section 491 0f the Penal Code |
In every case of cheating there is implicit agreement between the parties. The vital factor to be considered is whether at the time of agreement there was intention to carry out the terms of the contract or not. If there is nothing to show that there was no intention at the time of agreement which was arrived at, but the failure to fulfill the terms of the agreement was the subsequent event, the offence of cheating cannot be said to have been committed. It would only be a case of breach of contract/ |
| 2. |
3 |
2015 |
Civil Petition for leave to Appeal No. 1536 of 2010
3 SCOB [2015] AD 5 |
Third Party`s right of appeal ; Service of summons |
Even a third party can file an appeal in case he is affected by a decree passed in a suit. |
| 3. |
3 |
2015 |
Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2007
3 SCOB [2015] AD 11 |
Hindu law; life interest; legal necessity for transferring land |
It is true that in this kabala dated 02.03.1997 it has been mentioned that for performing the Shradhya ceremonies of her parents Komoda sold this land to the plaintiff. But this recital only in the document is not enough to prove that actually there was legal necessity for transferring this land by Komoda-who, admittedly, had life interest only in the land in question. Evidence is necessary to prove that actually there was legal necessity for transferring this land by Komoda. |
| 4. |
3 |
2015 |
Civil Petition for leave to Appeal Nos. 2080-2081 of 2010
3 SCOB [2015] AD 16 |
Benami Transaction; Immovable property; function of the Court; Section 5 of Land Reform Ordinance, 1984 |
The preamble cannot control the meaning and expression when the meaning of the expression is clear and ambiguous. The aid of the preamble can be taken if the meanings of the words to be interpreted are not clear and ambiguous. |
| 5. |
3 |
2015 |
Civil Petition for leave to Appeal No.1659 of 2013
3 SCOB [2015] AD 24 |
Article 102 (5) of the Constitution; Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974 |
The bank concerned being a company under the Companies Act, does not come within the ambit of article 102(5) of the Constitution. So, we are of the view that the Rule in the instant case ought to have been discharged on the same ground, especially when the same Bench had decided earlier that the employees of Pubali Bank Limited are not in the service of the Republic or of any Corporation, National Enterprise or Local Authority. |
| 6. |
3 |
2015 |
Civil Petition for leave to Appeal No.2495 of 2010
3 SCOB [2015] AD 27 |
Service benefit |
The petitioner got appointment in 1997, that is, long before the promulgation of the Service Rules of 2005. So he is entitled to get benefit of the Service Rules under which he got his appointment, that is, he is entitled to get the benefits as provided in Service Rules of 1988 and his service would be regulated under the said provision of law. |
