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

Case Number Parties Short Description
651
Computer Source Limited Vs. Mominul Islam, Managing Director and Chief Executive, represented to IPDC Finance Limited.
652
Md. Ishaque Vs. Additional Deputy Commissioner (Revenue), Chittagong and others
653
Md. Shamsuddin and others Vs. Katrina Andlib Chowdhury and others
654
Mrs. Bilkis, wife of late Dulal Miah and others.-Vs-Land Reforms Board, Courts of Wards, Ministry of Land represented by its Manager of 141-143 Motijheel, C/A, Dhaka and others.
Dismissed
655
Ali Hossain Vs. The State
656
Abdul Mohammad Salem Jamadar-Vs-Moslehuddin and others
Absolute
657
Mst. Taslima Khatun Vs. Most. Momtaz Begum
658
Mohammad Moazzam Hossain .... Petitioner -VersusMd. Gias Uddin Mia and others ....Opposite-parties
659
Mahtab Uddin Ahmed --- Plaintiff-Petitioner. -Versus- Robi Axiata Limited and others --- Defendants-Opposite parties.
660
Government of the People`s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Sherpur. … Defendant No.1-appellant -Versus- Md. Abul Hashem being died his legal heirs 1(Ka) Kamrun Nahar Hashem and others … Defendants-proforma-respondents
661
Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique Vs. The State and another
Discharged with modification.
662
Md. Tayajul Islam -Versus- The State and another
663
Md. Alamgir Siddiqui (Badsha) -Versus- Shah Mohammad Imran and another
664
Md. Rafique Ahmed -Versus- The State and another
665
Gopal Adhikari vs. Mohammad Fasiul Alam Chowdhury and another
Discharged
666
The State -Vs- Md. Sheikh Farid
667
Md. Fazlul Haque Pramanik being dead his legal heirs 1(Ka) Most. Rofikon Nesa and others .... Petitioners -VersusSaleha Khatun wife of late Kalu Pramanik and others ....Opposite-parties
668
Md. Komruzzaman Sarder Vs. Md. Abul Khayer Sarder and another.
Disposed of
669
Rupali Bank Limited, S.K. Road Branch, Narayanganj represented by its Manager.-Vs-Md. Habibur Rahman, son of A. Rahman of R.K. Das Road, Police Station and District- Narayanganj and others.
Discharged
670
Md. Jahangir Hossain Vs. The State and another
671
Mizanur Rahman Vs. The State and another
672
Nasim Ahmed Vs. The State
Disposed of.
673
Monjur Hossain Khan and others vs. Md. Kamrul Hassan and others
ABSOLUTE
674
Md. Khoyrat Hossain vs the state
675
Mst. Rina Akter being dead his heirs- Tahura Akter and others Vs. Md. Nurul Islam and another
676
Md. Rais Uddin -Vs- Md. Taiz Uddin Ahammed Taz and others
An application under Order 9 rule 13 CPC, which gave rise to Miscellaneous Case No. 106 of 1989, was filed on 16.11.89. From this it is apparent that this application for setting aside the ex parte decree was filed after 49 days from the date of passing the impugned decree. Article 164 of the Limitation Act provides that an application for setting aside an ex parte decree shall have to be filed within 30 days from the date of the decree where summons was duly served and within 30 days from the date of knowledge when summons was not duly served. In our case under review there is no denial of the fact of due service of summons. So, evidently this case is governed by Article 164 of the Limitation Act, which provides that the application for setting aside the ex parte decree is required to be filed within 30 days from the date of decree impugned.
677
S. M. Prince (Babu) -Vs- Md. Tozammel Haque Sarker and others
The plaintiff mentioned the number of the C.S. and S. A. Khatians and also the plot numbers in the suit, and thus, there was full compliance with the provisions of Order VII Rule 3 of the Code. And since no fraction or portion of the lands of the two plots was claimed, there was no necessity of giving any Chauhaddi or boundary of the suit plots. "If the dispute involves complicated questions of title, the plaintiff must establish his title by filing a regular suit for declaration of title. A simple suit for a permanent injunction should not be allowed to be used as a testing device to ascertain the title".
678
Sultan Ahamed Vs. The State
679
Sultan Ahamed Vs. The State
680
Most. Julekha Khatun vs the state and another
681
Falik Uddin Chowdhury being died his legal heirs: petitioner Nos. 1-8. =Versus= Fazlur Rahman Chowdhury and another
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure
682
Sadequl and others =Versus= Sadir Ahmmod and others
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
683
Md. Mozammel Hoque {died leaving behind his legal heirs: 1(a)-1(g)}. =Versus= Md. Abdul Hamid Mollah {died leaving behind his legal heirs: 1(Ka)-1(Chha)} and others
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Against Decree)
684
Sreemoti Chapala Bala Das and others =Versus= Mrinal Kanti Shaha {(O.P. No. 2 died leaving behind her legal heirs: 2(a), 2(b)
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
685
Md. Zarzis =Versus= Moulana Md. Idris alias Md. Idris Ali {died leaving behind his legal heirs: 1(a)-1(f)} and subsequently O.P No. 1(e). Most. Zakera Khatun died leaving behind her legal heirs: 1(e)(i)- 1(e)(vi)
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
686
Md. Khabir Uddin and others =Versus= Mowlana Abdul Wahab {died leaving behind his legal heirs: 1(a)-1(v)}and others
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
687
Mohammad Aminul Haque and others =Versus= Md. Jalal Ahmed and another
An application under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Against Decree)
688
Sree Sunil Kumar Dev ........ Plaintiff-petitioner -Versus- Sreemati Parul Rani Chowdhury being dead her heirs Ashish Kumar Chowdhury alias Chandu and others .... Defendant-opposite parties
689
Md. Solaiman Hossen -Vs- Md. Anwar Hossen and others
The onus of proof entirely lies upon the party, who asserts that the transfer is a sub-kabala in disguise of a deed of exchange under section 101 and 103 of the Evidence Act [ I of 1872] The preemptor`s incumbent duty is to prove by adequate tangible, credible evidence that the deed in question is out and out a sale deed, in disguise of a deed of exchange.
690
Gopendra Kumar Das being dead his heirs Dulan Kumar Talukder and others Vs. Dharoni Das and others
Appeal is allowed remanding the suit to the trial Court.
691
Mowlavi Siddique Ahammad and others Vs. Kabir Ahamad and others
692
Md. Abdul Khalek, being dead, his heirs: Md. Oyaz Kuruny and others -Vs- Md. Monayem Hossain and others
Any land recorded in Khatian as Bagan Bari, Bithi, Bari but situated outside the municipal area should fall within the definition of agricultural land. Mention of a wrong provision or omission to mention the provision containing the source of power will not invalidate an order where such power exists.
693
Monira Begum Promi-Vs-Mohammad Kaium
694
Mrs. Ponia Akter, wife of late Abdur Rahim and another.-Vs-Md. Alamin alias Montu, son of late Ahamad Hossain of village- Dhekia, Police Station- Hossainpur, District- Kishoreganj and others.
Appeal allowed and rule discharged
695
Md. Rafiq Ahmed vs the state
696
Khandaker Soikat vs the state
697
Sinha Power Generation Company Limited, having its registered office at Mohakhali Tower (13th Floor), 82 Mohakhali Commercial Area, Dhaka-1212 represented by its Managing Director, namely, Arifur Rahman Sinha.-Vs-Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) represented by its Chairman having office at Wapda Building, 1st Floor, Motijheel C/A, Dhaka-1000.
Appeal dismissed and rule discharged
698
Mostofa Mohsin vs t he state and another
699
Md. Harunur Rashid Vs. Motiar Rahman and others
700
Md. Ramiz Uddin being dead his legal hiers_ Mosammot Meherun Nessa and others Vs. Sree Somir Ranjan Sarkar and others
This Site is Visited :