Case Number Parties Short Description 1 Civil Revision 3084/2024 (Civil Revision 3084/2024) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 18-FEB-25 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Ishrat Amin Vs.Md. Shahjahan Miah alias Majnu Miah and others In the event of violation of a decree of permanent injunction, the decree is enforceable by taking recourse to the provision of Order XXI rule 32(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and not by a fresh suit but where willful disobedience of the order of injunction is alleged, such violation must be proved by cogent, independent and reliable evidence and the Court must be satisfied upon inquiry and on consideration of the materials on record before passing order under Order XXI rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure that the judgment-debtor has willfully disobeyed or violated injunction in defiance of the majesty of law. If violation is proved, the decree of permanent injunction can be executed by attachment of the property or putting the judgment debtor in civil imprisonment or by both or directing the judgment-debtor for making delivery of possession of the dispossessed property in favour of the decree-holder. 2 Civil Revision 2915/2019 (Civil Revision 2915/2019) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 09-FEB-25 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Abdur Rashid Bepary being dead his legal heirs; 1(a) Jahanara Begum and others Vs. Abdul Ohab Khan being dead his legal heirs 1. (Ka) Md. Shajahan Khan and others If a property is sold subject to an option of repurchase within a stipulated time, the agreement to reconvey may be specifically enforced if the vendor exercises his option within the stipulated time. A sale with a condition of repurchase can be carefully distinguished from a mortgage by conditional sale. Right to repurchase is lost if it is not exercised within the stipulated time. Where in a deed of sale, an option of repurchase is given to the vendor within a stipulated time with further stipulation that on failure to exercise the option or to fulfill the terms thereof within the stipulated time the agreement for resale would stand canceled, the option of repurchase is in the nature of a concession or privilege which is available only if the condition is strictly complied with. The facts and circumstances of this case clearly reveals that the transactions were not mortgages but out and out sales with an agreement to reconvey within five years from 07.08.1961 which were not alive and subsisting on the date of promulgation of President’s Order 88 of 1972, i.e. on 03.08.1972 and accordingly, the ratio settled in 1 BLC (AD) 90 is applicable in this case and the case reported in 24 BLC (AD) 4 cannot help the plaintiff-petitioners. Accordingly, the plaintiffs have no legal right and locus-standi to institute the present suit for declaration of title to and redemption of the suit land. The principles of law deduced by our Apex Court is very clear that the trial Court would insist imperatively on examining the party at the first hearing so that bogus litigation can be shot down at the earliest stage and if the ultimate result of the suit is as clear as daylight such a suit should be properly buried at its inception so that no further time is consumed in a fruitless litigation. If the plaintiff does not have any legal character/interest in the suit property, in such a situation, the plaint can be rejected by resorting to the provision of section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3 Civil Revision 63/2023 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 24-NOV-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Mahmudul Haque Patowary and others vs. Samin Yeasar Haque Patowary and others. An “attorney holder” cannot depose or give evidence in place of his principal for the acts done by the principal or transactions or dealings of the principal of which principal alone has personal knowledge. This view finds support in the cases of Janki Vashdeo vs. Industrial Bank limited 2005 (2) SCC 217, Shambhu Shastri vs. State of Rajasthan, 1989 2 WLN 713 (Raj), Ram Prasad vs. Hari Narain AIR 1998 (Raj) 185, Shankar Finance 4 Civil Revision 667/2015 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-SEP-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Abu Alam and another ...Petitioners. -Versus- 1(Ka) Farida Begum and others ....Opposite parties. 5 First Appeal 262/2012 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-SEP-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Monoranjan Ghosh and others ...Appellants. -Versus- Mohammad Jashim Uddin Khan and others 6 First Appeal 706/2019 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-AUG-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Al Mamun Mirza and another Vs. Haji Md. Akkash Ali and another. In the prevailing context, a registered contract for sale of immovable property can be specifically enforced by filing a suit for specific performance of contract under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act only, subject to deposit of the balance consideration of the contract before filing the suit as provided under section 21A(b) of the Specific Relief Act and upon payment of ad valorem court fees. In view of the above, no other alternative remedy in the form of declaratory relief under section 42 of the Specific Relief Act is available for a vendee of the contract for sale to enforce the contract. 7 First Appeal 245/2013 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-AUG-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Munshi Abdus Sobhan and another Vs Abdul Mannan being dead his legal heirs: 1(a) Samirun Nesa and others Cause of action presupposes the existence of a right in the plaintiff which right has either been infringed or is threatened to be infringed. Cause of action cannot be considered in a isolated way and the whole averments made in the plaint are to be seen and taken together to see whether any cause of action has been disclosed or not. Cause of action of a suit arises when right of a plaintiff is denied or invaded by the other side and the suit for declaration of title on a property will be well within time if it is laid within the period of six years as prescribed under Article 120 of the Limitation Act. Against the wrong record of rights the person whose interest is affected is required to file the suit seeking declaration of title within six years from the date the person in whose name record has been wrongly prepared and finally published raises claim on the basis of wrong record. 8 Civil Revision 121/2024 (Civil Revision 121/2024) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 30-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Unidev Trading (BD) Limited, represented by its Managing Director. ...Petitioner. -Versus- Abdus Samad alias Abdus Salam and others . ....Opposite parties. 9 First Misc Appeal 370/2017 (First Misc Appeal 370/2017) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Selim @ Md. Selim Miah and others. ...Appellants. -Versus- Bangladesh House Building Finance Corporation and others. ....Respondents. 10 Civil Revision 2/2024 (Civil Revision 02/2024) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 24-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Shamsun Nahar and others. ...Petitioners. -Versus- Most. Hosne Ara Begum and others. ...Opposite parties. 11 Civil Revision 125/2022 (Civil Revision 125/2022) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 24-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Ramit Kumar Kanungo represented by his constituted attorneys Mohammad Ali Sha and others. ...Petitioners -Versus- Ali Imam and others. ....Opposite parties 12 Civil Revision 3722/2017 (Civil Revision 3722/2017) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Momtaz Begum ...Petitioner. -Versus- Fatema Begum and others. ....Opposite parties. 13 Civil Revision 139/2024 (Civil Revision 139/2024) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Mohammad Kamal Pasha ...Petitioner. -Versus- Three Star Properties Limited and others . ....Opposite parties. 14 Civil Revision 33/2020 (Civil Revision 33/2020) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Anowara Begum and another. ...Petitioners. -Versus- 1(ka) Dr. Md. Nizam Uddin Faruque and others. ...Opposite parties. 15 First Misc Appeal 22/2023 (First Misc Appeal 22/2023) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-JUL-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Monir Ahmmed ...Appellant. -Versus- Anowar Hosain Khan. ....Respondent 16 Civil Revision 2685/2023 (Civil Revision 2685/2023) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 10-JUN-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Julhas Uddin Jibon Vs. Md. Ayub Khan and others Accordingly, the learned Registrar General of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh is directed to circulate through a General Notification among the learned Judges of the sub-ordinate courts that “the Sub-ordinate Civil Courts having original jurisdiction should strictly follow the provisions of section 21A(b) of the Specific Relief Act and the law declared by the hon’ble Appellate Division in Abul Kalam (Md) vs. Md Mohi Uddin and others, 69 DLR (AD) 239 and if the plaintiff fails to deposit balance consideration at the time of filing of a suit for specific performance of the contract, the Court must refuse to register the suit and return the plaint to the plaintiff”. 17 Civil Revision 1367/2018 (Civil Revision 1367/2018) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 09-JUN-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Serajul Islam and others ...Petitioners. -Versus- Md. Sujan Bhuiyan and others ....Opposite parties. 18 Civil Revision 2670/2019 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-JUN-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Bikalpa Bahumukhi Samabaya Samity Limited represented by its Secretary. Vs. Md. Rafizuddin Bepari and others. A suit for declaration of title and recovery of Khas possession on the allegation that the plaintiff was dispossessed or discontinued possession is governed by Article 142 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, the plaintiff of such suit is to prove that the dispossession or discontinuance of possession took place within twelve years before filing of the suit. In order to grant a decree for recovery of possession the Court is required to find on which date the plaintiff was dispossessed from the suit land and whether the suit was filed within twelve years from the date of dispossession of the suit land. Accordingly, in such a suit the plaintiff is required to allege in the plaint that he or she was dispossessed within twelve years of the institution of the suit and if he or she fails to do so he has no cause of action to institute the suit. 19 Civil Revision 2484/2005 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 30-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Mominul Hoque Shah ...Petitioner. -Versus- Md. Fazlul Haque Shah Chowdhury ....Opposite party. 20 First Misc Appeal 11/2012 (First Misc Appeal 11/2012) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 30-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Showkat Ali ...Appellant. -Versus- Bangladesh Housing Building Finance Corporation and another 21 First Misc Appeal 64/2020 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 30-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Muhammad Moniruzzaman Khan and others. ...Appellants. -Versus- Mosammat Saleha Begum and others. ....Respondents. 22 First Misc Appeal 40/2021 (First Misc Appeal 40/2021) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Masrur Hasan Khan (Orin) and another Vs. Belal Hossain and others 23 Civil Revision 151/2021 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Sofiur Rahman Vs. Equity Property Management (Pvt.) Limited Represented by the Managing Director and others Sub-section (12) of section 12 of the Arbitration Act stipulates that the decision of the learned District Judge under sub-sections (3), (4) and (7) of section 12 of the Act, 2001 shall be final. Since the decision of the learned District Judge in respect of appointment of Arbitrator(s) under section 12 is final in view of the provision under sub-section (12) of the Arbitration Act, 2001 no revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is maintainable before this Court against such decision of the learned District Judge. Accordingly, this civil revision is not maintainable. 24 First Misc Appeal 135/2019 (First Misc Appeal 135/2019) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Fauji Chatkal Limited, represented by its Managing Director, Adamjee Court (2nd Floor), 115-120 Motijheel C/A, Dhaka. Vs Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary Ministry of Education, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others. The consistent view of apex courts of this sub-continent is that not only a gift under Muhammadan Law but also under Transfer of property Act, a gift must be coupled with acceptance and delivery of possession. Where a donee of property is in bona fide possession of it, though the gift had not been perfected by a registered instrument in accordance with law, the donor or its representative cannot oust the donee who had been in undisturbed possession of the property for a long period though such period falls short of 12 years. 25 Civil Revision 4670/2009 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Pubali Bank Limited Vs. Mrs. Ferdousi Begum and others 26 Civil Revision 1927/2005 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Mst. Kamrun Nessa and others Vs. Most. Meher Nigar and others. 27 First Misc Appeal 280/2020 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Abu Hena Mustafa Kamal Vs. Md. Shakil and others 28 Civil Revision 4251/2011 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Engineer M. Nasrul Hoq (Nusrum) Vs. Eac Industrial Ingredients (Bangladesh) Limited and others 29 First Misc Appeal 75/2020 (First Misc Appeal 75/2020) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 09-MAY-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Executive Engineer, Roads and Highways Department, Roads Division, Sylhet. ...Appellant. -Versus- Faruque Chowdhury @ Zahanur Reza Chowdhury. ...Respondent. 30 Civil Revision 611/2022 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 23-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Jesmn Hosain and others Vs. Ayatun Nessa and others. The Indian Supreme Court upon considering its earlier decisions of the cases of Janki Vashdeo Bhojwani vs. Indusind Bank Limited 2005 (2) SCC 217; Shambhu Shastri vs. State of Rajasthan, 1989 2 WLN 713(Raj); Ram Prasad v. Hari Narain AIR 1998 (Raj) 185 and Shankar Finance 31 Civil Revision 605/2008 (Civil Revision 605/2008) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Taj Mohammad and others ...Petitioners. -Versus- Alta Miah and others ....Opposite parties. 32 Civil Revision 3596/2012 (Civil Revision 3596/2012) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 15-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Selamat Ullah Miji ...Petitioner. -Versus- Most. Solema Begum and others ....Opposite parties 33 Civil Revision 1619/2006 (Civil Revision 1619/2006) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 15-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Halima Jahan and others. ...Petitioners. -Versus- Md. Salim Bhuiyan being dead his heirs. Most. Kawsar Begum and others ....Opposite parties 34 Civil Revision 1562/2019 (Civil Revision 1562/2019) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 ShafiqurRahman Chowdhury ...Petitioner. -Versus- Liakat Ali Chowdhury . 35 Civil Revision 2883/2014 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Shawon Chowdhury alias Shangkor Prasad Sarker and others ...Petitioners. -Versus- Faridul Alam and another. 36 Civil Revision 1476/2018 (Civil Revision 1476/2018) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Nazrul Islam and others. ...Petitioners. -Versus- Amorendra Narayan and others. ....Opposite parties. 37 First Misc Appeal 55/2020 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Zayeda Begum . ...Appellant. -Versus- Md. Rafiqul Islam @ Fenu and others ....Respondents. 38 Civil Revision 617/2016 (Civil Revision 617/2016) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Humayun Kabir and others ...Petitioners. -Versus- Deputy Commissioner, Dhaka and others . ....Opposite parties. 39 Civil Revision 3551/2019 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 11-MAR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Fazle Ali and another Vs. Mosammat Chondona Begum and others 40 Civil Rule 338/2020 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 11-MAR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Government of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh Vs. Capital Assets Production Ltd. and others 41 Civil Revision 488/2024 (Civil Revision 488/2024) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 10-MAR-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman Khan ...Petitioner. -Versus- Sonali Bank Limited . ....Opposite party. 42 Civil Revision 4167/2023 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 29-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Tonay Molla and others vs. Uttara Bank Limited and others 43 First Appeal 395/2014 (First Appeal 395/2014) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Hazrot Ali and others . ...Appellants. -Versus- Mst. Khudu Khatun and others . ....Respondents. 44 First Appeal 101/2005 (.../) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 27-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Sarder Shafiqul Islam Vs. Mahbubur Rahman and others. As per section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act the right of redemption is available to the mortgagor after the principal loan amount has become due and paid. Section 60A of the Transfer of Property Act allows the mortgagor to require the mortgagee to assign the mortgage debt and transfer mortgagor’s property to such third party as the mortgagor may direct and the mortgagee shall be bound to obey such direction of the mortgagor. It is settled principle of law that when there is no right, there is no remedy. For the maintainability of a declaratory suit under section 42 of the Specific Relief Act the plaintiff must have a legal character or any right as to the property in suit. A person cannot sue for a declaration of his right unless he has an existing right. In the instant case, the mortgagors neither took permission from HBFC before the transfer was made to the plaintiffs nor repaid the loan amount before the transfer. As such, in view of the relevant provisions of Transfer of Property Act, as discussed above, as well the decision the hon’ble Appellate Division in Syed Jubayer Hossain (supra) the transaction was a fraudulent one and by dint of such transfer plaintiffs could not acquire right, title or interest in the suit property. Accordingly, their suit for declaration that the execution proceeding against their vendor- mortgagors was illegal, in effective and not binding upon them is not maintainable under section 42 of the Specific Relief Act. The case of Sekandar, 3 LM (AD) 448 (supra) is quite distinguishable considering the facts and circumstances of the instant case because in the said case the third-party-claimants claimed their independent title to and possession in the suit property from the persons other than the mortgagors. In the instant case the plaintiffs are claiming their title to and possession in the suit property through the mortgagors. As such, the plaintiffs cannot be considered as third-party-claimants and accordingly, they have no remedy under rule 103 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the auction process because of the fact that the plaintiffs have stepped into the shoes of the mortgagors/ judgment debtors. 45 First Misc Appeal 177/2021 (First Misc Appeal 177/2021) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Rashid Ahmed and others. ...Appellants. -Versus- Messers Three Star Properties Limited and another. ...Respondents. 46 First Misc Appeal 80/2021 (First Misc Appeal 80/2021) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Alamgir Hossain. ...Appellant. -Versus- Md. Mansur Ali and others ....Respondents. 47 Civil Revision 924/2018 (Civil Revision 924/2018) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Mohiuddin Ahammad Bhuiyan ...Petitioner. -Versus- Badrun Nahar. ....Opposite party. 48 Civil Revision 3978/2007 (Civil Revision 3978/2007) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 06-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), represented by its Vice Chancellor, Dhaka. ...Petitioner. -Versus- Amena Begum and others ...Opposite parties. 49 Civil Revision 1551/2008 (Civil Revision 1551/2008) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 06-FEB-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 Md. Jalaluddin Sheikh ...Petitioner. -Versus- Md. Abdul Jabbar ....Opposite party. 50 First Appeal 153/2003 (First Appeal 153/2003) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 31-JAN-24 From : Annex Building Court No. 9 M/S Central Insurance Company Limited. ...Appellant. -Versus- Madina Refineries (Salt) Limited and another. ....Respondents.