Home : Supreme Court of Bangladesh

1

Criminal Revision 1024/2007
(Criminal Revision 1024/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Abdul Aziz -Versus- The State

2

Criminal Revision 1008/2007
(Criminal Revision 1008/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Moktarul Islam alias Md. Moktarul Is: -Versus- The State

3

Criminal Revision 1043/2007
(Criminal Revision 1043/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Abul Hossain and others -Versus- The State

4

Criminal Revision 1088/2007
(Criminal Revision 1088/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Haroon or Rashid -Versus- The State

5

Criminal Revision 967/2007
(Criminal Revision 967/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Abdul Karim -Versus- The State

6

Criminal Revision 278/2023
(Criminal Revision 278/2023)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Mamunur Rashid @ Abdullah Al Mamun -Versus- The State and another

7

Criminal Revision 2677/2025
(Criminal Revision 2677/2025)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Kabil Hossain Kazi -Versus- The State and another

8

Criminal Revision 2349/2019
(Criminal Revision 2349/2019)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Jashijul Hoque -Versus- The State and another

9

Criminal Revision 2787/2025
(Criminal Revision 2787/2025)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Rofiqul Islam -Versus- The State and another

10

Writ Petition 8602/2007
(Writ Petition 8602/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Abdul Latif being dead his legal heirs 1(a) Saleha Begum and others Vs. The Government and others

Absolute

11

First Misc Appeal 373/2007
(First Misc Appeal 373/2007)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Shahera Begum and others Vs. Md. Sekander Hayat alias Abdul Jalil Miah and others

Dismissed

12

First Misc Appeal 193/1997
(First Misc Appeal 193/1997)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Taslimuddin Ahmed being dead his heirs:- Ferdous Ahmed and others Vs. Md. Habibullah, Manager, Dhaka Nowab Estate, Court of Wards and another

Dismissed

13

First Misc Appeal 216/2002
(First Misc Appeal 216/2002)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Kutubuddin Miah Vs. Surjiban Chandra Sirker and others

Dismissed

14

First Misc Appeal 328/2008
(First Misc Appeal 328/2008)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Mahfuzur Rahman Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others

Dismissed

15

First Misc Appeal 268/2000
(First Misc Appeal 268/2000)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Shamsun Nahar and others Vs. Eastern Housing Ltd. and others

Dismissed

16

First Misc Appeal 140/2000
(First Misc Appeal 140/2000)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Begum Roqaiya Hossain and others Vs. Ummul Fateh (Khuku Moni) and others

Dismissed

17

VAT Appeal 28/2015
(VAT Appeal 28/2015)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Airtel Bangladesh Limited -Versus- Customs, Excise and VAT Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka and another

Appeal dismissed

18

First Misc Appeal 144/1999
(First Misc Appeal 144/1999)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Fanindra Chandra Roy and others Vs. Sree Bhabesh Chandra Roy and others

Dismissed

19

Writ Petition 8214/2024
(Writ Petition 8214/2024 with 8213/2024 with 17296/2025)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

S. Alam Vegetable Oil Limited -Versus- The Commissioner, Customs, Excise

Rules are dicharged

20

Writ Petition 7939/2009
(Writ Petition 7939/2009)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Buildtrade Engineering -Versus- Customs, Excise and VAT Appellate Tribunal and others

Absolute-in-part

21

Writ Petition 14074/2025
(Writ Petition 14074/2025)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Sartaaj Steel Mills Limited and others -Versus- Artha Rin Adalat No. 2, Dhaka and others

Rule Absolute

22

Writ Petition 9316/2024
(Writ Petition 9316/2024)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

M/s. Integral Electric Company -Versus- Bangladesh Bank and others

Rule Discharged

23

First Appeal 149/2020
(.../)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Md. Nur Islam and others ...Appellants. -Versus- Bodu Mia and others ....Respondents.

Article 95 of the First Schedule of the Limitation Act stipulates the period of limitation of filing a suit to set aside a decree obtained by fraud or for other relief on the ground of fraud and said period is three years which begins to run when the fraud become known to the party wronged. This suit comes under section 39 of the Specific Relief Act. An ex-parte decree can be set aside by filing application under Order IX rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the limitation for filing such application is 30 days from the date of ex-parte decree or where the summons has not been duly served, 30 days from the date when the defendants came to know about the ex-parte decree.

Moreover, section 10 of the Code enacts a rule of procedure pure and simple and as such a decree passed in contrary to section 10 is not a nullity and cannot be disregarded in another suit as per decision of the case of Jamani Kanta Roy Chowdhury and ors. vs. Aswini Kumar Haldar and ors. reported in 12 DLR 755.

24

First Appeal 34/2025
(.../)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26

Sree Dipok Ranhjan Kar .....Appellant. -Versus- Sree Babul Ranjan Kar ......Respondent.

Thus, after considering the question from different angles, we are of the view that the contentions proceeding for grant or refusal of probate or letters of administration is not a suit in substance and the order in the said proceeding is not a decree, as it does not fulfil the ingredients of decree as defined under the Code. There is no requirement in law that an order in a contentious proceeding should be followed by a decree. In that view of the matter, a decree is not required in law, to be filed along with the memorandum of appeal under section 299 of the Succession Act and as such, this appeal cannot be held to be incompetent due to non-filing of a copy of a decree along with the memorandum of appeal.

The provisions of sections 19-C, 19-H and 19-I of the Court Fees Act, 1870 clearly suggest that the court-fees according to the valuation fixed under section 19-H of the Act will be payable at a stage if and when an order entitling the grant of probate or letters of administration would be made and not any previous stage.

The provisions of sections 19-C, 19-H and 19-I of the Court Fees Act, 1870 clearly suggest that the court-fees according to the valuation fixed under section 19-H of the Act will be payable at a stage if and when an order entitling the grant of probate or letters of administration would be made and not any previous stage.

Above citations clearly suggest that if the evidence adduced is not succeeded in removing the legitimate doubt as to the mental capacity of the testator; if the dispositions made in the will appears to be unnatural, improbable or unfair in the light of the relevant circumstances, or, if the will otherwise indicate that the said dispositions is not the result of the testator`s free will and mind, such legitimate suspicions should be completely removed before the document is accepted as the last will of the testator. Moreover, even if the caveator does not raise the question of testamentary capacity i.e the testator had full sense, he was in sound mind and he understood the nature and effect of his action in putting his signature or placing his mark on the document, yet the propounder is not exonerated from the incumbent duty to prove that the testator had sound and disposing mind and that he fully understood the nature and effect of his action in executing the will. Moreover, all legitimate suspicions should be completely removed before the document is accepted as the last will of the testator.

25

Criminal Revision 4249/2025
(Criminal Revision 4249/2025)

অনুবাদ (Google)
Uploaded on : 21-APR-26