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

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Local Government Engineering Directorate, Narsingdi, represented by the Executive Engineer, Narsingdi. -Vs- Abdus Sobhan being dead his legal heirs: Mrs. Laki Begum and others
The requiring body, preferred a cross-appeal against the Judgment and order of the Arbitration Court. However, the petitioner does not have any locus standi to agitate the mixed question of fact and law, as there is no provision in the Ordinance of 1982 to make the requiring body either a necessary party or a proper party to the arbitration proceeding for compensation to the landowner.
2
Md. Monir Hossain -Vs- Kamrun Nahar
According to Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, no court shall stay the proceedings of a previously instituted suit if the subject matter is the same.
3
Shyamal Kantyi Dutta -Vs- Arunangshu Dutta and others
A plaint of a suit cannot be rejected before filing the written statement.
4
Khairul Basar and others -Vs- Jotirmoy Saha Ray and others.
It is the settled cardinal principle of law that, in order to succeed in a case under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, the plaintiff must prove his dispossession from the suit land, and the suit must be filed within 6 (six) months from the alleged dispossession from the suit land.
5
Md. Jahangir Hossen and others Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others
Disposed of
6
Md. Sultan Mia and others -Vs- Omar Kitab and others
In a suit for a permanent injunction, the court may incidentally inquire into the prima facie title of the parties, unless the plaintiffs` possession is clearly established by the evidence, in which case the plaintiffs cannot obtain a decree for a permanent injunction. A simple suit for a permanent injunction should not be allowed to be used as a testing device for ascertaining title.
7
Mosleh Uddin Ahmmed (Mehedi) and others Vs. Nurun Nahar (Ami) and others
Appeal is dismissed.
8
A.K.M. Fazlul Haque Vs. The Government and others
Rule is discharged.
9
Md. Shakhawat Hossain Vs. The Government of Bangladesh and others
Rule is made absolute.
10
Abdul Matin Vs. The Government of Bangladesh
The Rule is made absolute.
11
Md. Yousuf Ali Vs. Government of Bangldesh
The Rule Nisi is made absolute.
12
Laxmi Narayan Bhua and another -Versus- The State and another
13
Md. Hashnine and another -Versus- The Fifth Court of Settlement, Segun Bagicha, Ramna, Dhaka and another
Discharged
14
Mir Mozammel Haque and others -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
15
Monir Thakur -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
16
Md. Alamgir Hossain Bhuiyan -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
17
Md. Mahbubur Rahman and another -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Disposed of
18
Khandkar Tajul Islam -Versus- Bangladesh Bank and another
Discharged
19
B.K. Md. Ferdaus Alom alias Md. Ferdous Alam ... Petitioner -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
20
Md. Ain Uddin Sarker and another -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
21
Md. Foysal Kabir -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
22
Md. Mehedi Hasan Abir -Versus- Bangladesh Bank and others
Discharged
23
Md. Fazlul Hoque -Versus- Bangladesh Bank and others
Discharged
24
Md. Rony -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
25
Safiul Hamid Aasem and another -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and other
Discharged
26
Md. Firoz Kabir Tinku -Versus- Bangladesh Bank and others
Discharged
27
Md. Belayet Hossain -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
28
Md. Maksud Chowdhury -Versus- Government of Bangladesh and others
Discharged
29
Md. Shamim -Versus- The Judge, Artha Rin Adalat No.03, Dhaka and another
Discharged
30
Mosammat Morium Khatun -Vs- Md. Akhiluddin Sheikh and others
Under the new law, the homestead is exempted from all legal process, and the transferee is not liable to be evicted therefrom by any means.
31
Gulf Oil Marine Limited vs. M.T. FADL-E-RABBI, IMO No. 9078177, Flag- Panama and others
dismissed
32
Ban Hoe Leong Marine Suppliers SDN BHD vs. M.T. FADL-E-RABBI, IMO No. 9078177, Flag- Panama and others
dismissed
33
Saifuddin Mahmud ............ Plaintiff -VERSUS- M.T. FADL-E-RABBI, (IMO No. 9078177, Flag: Panama) and others. .....…Defendants
34
Shahjahan Howlader and another -Vs- Abdul Quddus Biswas, being dead, his heirs: Most. Rahima Khatun and others
The plaintiff, as P.W.1, in his deposition, admitted that he came to know of the alleged Deed of Heba-bil-ewaj in 2001. Therefore, it appears that the plaintiff filed the instant suit after 12(twelve) years of his knowledge of the alleged Deed of Heba-bil-ewaj. Consequently, we are of the firm view that the courts below rightly and judiciously considered the evidence on record, found that the suit was barred by limitation as per the provision so enumerated in Article 91 of the Limitation Act,1908.
35
Amjad Ahamed and others -Vs- Samuj Ali and others
The plaintiffs, being year-to-year leaseholders, had no locus standi to bring any suit before any jurisdiction of the courts of the country.
36
37
Md. Ayub ali Sikder Vs. The Government and others
Rule Nisi is discharged.
38
Hanif vs the state
39
Jahidul vs the state
40
Nurunnahar vs the state and another
41
42
Turap vs the state
43
Safikul Islam vs the state
44
Md. Riaz vs the state
45
Mrs. Shuhada Banu and another vs. Shahida Akhter and others
Dismissed
46
Md. Redwan Rahman Khan -Versus- The State
47
Md. Solaiman -Versus- The State and another
48
Md. Abul Kalam Azad -Versus- The State and another
49
Md. Mainul Islam -Versus- The State
50
Badol Roy -Versus- The State
This Site is Visited :