Home : Supreme Court of Bangladesh

101

Civil Revision 5318/1998

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Abdus Sobhan Versus Md. Arfanullah and others

102

Civil Revision 4392/2016

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Ansar Ali and another Versus Md. Mahbur Rahman and others

103

Civil Revision 4912/2010

অনুবাদ (Google)

Chandana Rani Sarkar Versus Protap Chandra Sarkar and anothers

104

Civil Revision 5828/2001

অনুবাদ (Google)

Dilip Kumar Khashkel being died his heirs 1(a) Kalpona Rani Khaskel and others Vs Ranu Bala Khashkel and others .

105

Civil Revision 1923/2020

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Aslam Miah Vs. Mrs. Morzina Begum and another

106

Writ Petition 3096/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Syed Jihad Ali and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others.

107

Writ Petition 613/2016

অনুবাদ (Google)

Alhaj M.A. Bari Khan Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Shipping others.

108

Writ Petition 10668/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Shamsul Haque Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Liberation War Affairs and others.

109

Civil Revision 2757/2021
(Civil Revision 2757/2021)

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

110

Civil Revision 1511/2017

অনুবাদ (Google)

Pruesiau Aug Marma and another Versus Aungmra Shang Marma and another

Chittagong Hill Tracts

111

Civil Revision 4148/2009

অনুবাদ (Google)

Executive Engineer, Roads and Highway Department, Tangail and others Vs. Abdul Karim being dead his heirs Md. Atikur Rahman and others

112

Civil Revision 5314/1998

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

113

Death Reference 40/2017
(Death Reference 40/2017)

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

114

Writ Petition 1307/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Saiful Islam and others Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Education and others.

115

First Appeal 151/2006
(First Appeal 151/2006)

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

116

First Appeal 8/2012

অনুবাদ (Google)

Mrs. Rabeya Khatun and others Versus Mrs. Taslima Hasa

117

Writ Petition 6671/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Waliul Islam and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others.

118

Writ Petition 2901/2020

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Al-Amin Vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Public Administration and others

119

Criminal Appeal(H) 9635/2018

অনুবাদ (Google)

Mohammad Ali vs The State and others

120

Writ Petition 4940/2021
(With Writ Petition No. 4941 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 4942 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 6451 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 8074 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 4665 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 3499 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 8484 of 2021 With Writ Petition No. 9417 of 2020)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Muhammad Mahmudur Rahman and others Versus The Government of Bangladesh and others.

NTRCA

121

Writ Petition 12038/2021
(WIth Writ Petition No. 11915 of 2021)

অনুবাদ (Google)

K.M. Khaled Versus Bangladesh Securities and Exchange Commission

122

Writ Petition 57/2022
(Writ Petition 57/2022)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Delowar Hossain Versus Bangladesh Election Commision, represented by the Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election Commission and others.

123

Writ Petition 11069/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Nazrul Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.

ইউনিয়ন তথ্য সেবা কেন্দ্র

124

Writ Petition 5399/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Muzahidul Islam Arif Versus Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.

125

Writ Petition 11837/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Abdus Salam Talukder and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others

126

Writ Petition 1820/2016

অনুবাদ (Google)

Jubair Ahmmed B.Sc Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.

127

Writ Petition 13822/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Mostafijur Rahman Versus The Government of Bangladesh and others

128

Writ Petition 2346/2020

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Jahidul Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.

129

Writ Petition 6344/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

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

130

Writ Petition 7223/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Rafiqul Islam Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and Others

131

Writ Petition 14578/2018

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Khalilur Rahman and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others.

132

Writ Petition 4486/2020

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

133

Writ Petition 15057/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

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.

134

Writ Petition 10493/2018

অনুবাদ (Google)

Mr. Abdul Bashar Mollah Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others

135

Writ Petition 11820/2018

অনুবাদ (Google)

Gopal Mozumder Versus Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education and others

136

Writ Petition 10818/2018

অনুবাদ (Google)

Plato Bala Versus Government of Bangladesh and others.

137

Writ Petition 9003/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Mesbaul Alam and others Versus The Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Local Government, Co-operative Division, Bangladesh Secretariat, Police Station-Ramna, District-Dhaka-1000 and others.

138

Writ Petition 1626/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Humayun Kabir Versus Governemnt of Bangladesh and others.

139

First Appeal 32/2004
(First Appeal 32/2004)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Sirajul Haque alias Sirajul Haque Howlader and others VS Zulekha Begum and others

Question of examination of the signature of Rustom Howlader through expert was reasonably raised from the side of the defence. According to the provisions laid down in sections 101 and 103 of the Evidence Act, the entire onus was upon the plaintiffs to prove that the signatures given by Rustom Howlader in all the documents are false because it is their specific case that Rustom Howlader never appeared in public due to his serious ailment and indisposition and blindness and even he was to be taken to the toilet by somebody else and remained bed ridden from 1980 until his death. Plaintiffs had to take resort to expert opinion in order to discharge their initial onus under section 101 of the Evidence Act to prove that those impugned documents were executed not by Rustom Howlader but by an imposter with a scheme to grab the property and Rustom Howlader was completely unable to perform his own affairs due to his serious illness. Law says when the initial onus is discharged by the plaintiff the onus then shifts upon the defendants to show the contrary.
.......
Now question arises whether D.W. 1 being wife of defendant No. 1 holds the same status of defendant No. 1 while deposing in the suit. Question of adverse presumption shall not arise if DW 1 holds the same position. Section 120 of the Evidence Act provides that husband instead of wife or wife instead of husband shall be competent witness. So according to the facts and circumstances of the instant case section 120 shall prevail over section 114(g) of the Evidence Act and the question on adverse presumption as argued does not arise.
......
The admission of Rustom Howlader that he executed those documents cannot be avoided when plaintiffs could not establish a definite and clear case on Rustom Howlader’s sickness. The execution is admitted and plaintiff had no knowledge on execution or passing of consideration being third party to the document. Plaintiffs cannot question about the consideration because it was between parties to the document. The transferee is to prove the payment of consideration when the transferor challenges the same. In the instant case, if the plaintiffs could prove by cogent and credible evidence that Rustom Howlader was seriously ill and blind from 1980 till his death, in that case the onus would lie upon the defendant to prove the payment of consideration.

140

Writ Petition 8009/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Dr. Mohib Ullah Khondoker Principal (Acting) Gonoshasthaya Versus The Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Population Control and others

141

Writ Petition 13334/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Md. Earul Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others.

142

Civil Order 4577/2022

অনুবাদ (Google)

Moyej Uddin Shah being dead his heirs Most. Hawa Begum Vs. Momtaj Shaha and others

There is no provision under Order XXVI of the Code of Civil Procedure to accept or reject the report submitted by the Commissioner because the law has precisely stated that the report of the Commissioner and the evidence taken by him shall be evidence in the suit and shall form part of the record. The law has given an opportunity to the parties to the suit to examine the Commissioner with the permission of the Court, to challenge the veracity of the report.

143

Civil Revision 594/2020
(/)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Anamika Corporation Ltd. and others Versus Humayan Mazhar Chowdhury and others

Arbitration Act

144

Writ Petition 12985/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

Abu Khair Md. Nazmul Huq and others Vs. The Government of Bangladesh

Power of Attorney

145

Writ Petition 8251/2019
(Writ Petition 8251/2019)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Habiba Aktherrun Nahar and others Vs. Govt. of Bangaldesh

146

Suo-Muto Rule 4/2021

অনুবাদ (Google)

The State vs The Anti-Corruption Commission, represented by its Chairman, 1, Segun Bagicha, Dhaka and others

147

Writ Petition 10208/2017

অনুবাদ (Google)

Khaerun Nessa alias Khairun Nessa and others vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others

Abandoned Property

148

Criminal Appeal(H) 10852/2019

অনুবাদ (Google)

LUTFOR RAHMANVS STATE

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT

149

Writ Petition 2458/2020
(with Writ Petition 2157/2020 with Writ Petition 3929/2020 with Writ Petition 2760/2020 with Writ Petition 2274/2019)

অনুবাদ (Google)

Mosh. Arfuna Khatun and others Vs. Bangladesh Represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Public Administration, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka-1000 and others

150

Criminal Appeal(H) 3536/2009

অনুবাদ (Google)

Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya Vs. The State and another