Bangladesh Labour Law Act (XLII of 2006) Sections 202(21) & Sections 317(4)

Power Invested to Labour Court—

There is a Distinction between the Election of a Collective Bargaining Agent and Election for the Office Bearers of a Trade Union—

Labour Court has not been invested with any power to adjudicate matters relating to the internal affairs, in particular dispute relating to election of its office bearers of a registered trade union and labour Court cannot entertain the same though the dispute relating to an election of the collective bargaining agent can be adjudicated by the labour Court as contem­plated by the provisions of section 202(21) of the Act, 2006. .....(15)

Affairs in Civil Nature Must Be Adjudicated By the Civil Court—

Section 317(4) entrusted the Director of Labour with power to oversee and supervise the election of a trade union and in the case of any dispute relating to internal affairs of a registered trade union which is civil in nature must be adjudicated by the civil Court, if party aggrieved go there to ventilate the same....... (16) 

In deciding the question of rejection of a plaint—

Court while deciding application about rejection of plaint is not permitted in law to travel beyond the averments made in the plaint although if any certain fact is brought to the notice of the Court, though not specifically mentioned in the plaint or crops up subsequent to the filing of the suit and accepted as true by both the parties, such a fact, though not referred to in the plaint, can be taken into con­sideration for deciding the question of rejection of a plaint.......(19) 

Trap Case under Rule 16 of the Bidhimala — “ফাঁদ মামলা (Trap Case)—

দূর্ণীতি প্রতিরোধের নিমিত্ত আইনের তফসিলভূক্ত অপরাধে জড়িত কোন ব্যাক্তি বা ব্যক্তিবর্গকে হাতে নাতে ধৃত করিবার উদ্দেশ্যে তদন্তের দায়িত্ব প্রাপ্ত কমিশনার এর এর অনুমোদনক্রমে তৎকতৃক ক্ষমতাপ্রাপ্ত কর্মকর্তা “ফাঁদ মামলা (Trap Case) প্রস্তুত করিতে বা পরিচালনা করিতে পারিবেন।”

There is no bar in catching red-handed any person by any law enforcing agency if the Commission has not been informed or assis­tance of Commissioner is not sought by any person for the scheduled offences committed by any government official, therefore, the law as its stand today is that if any offence to be trapped by any individual person or any law enforcing agency should not be necessarily a trap case under Rule 16 of the Bidhimala.

Companies Act (XVIII of 1994); Section 81

Procedure to Enable a Company To Holding on its Business—

Section 81 is a procedural section enabling a company to carry on its business as has to be conducted to the fullest extent possible at a general meeting unless faced with impractica­bility in doing so. The purposive aspect of the exercise of this Court's discretion is simply "to allow the company to get on with managing its own affairs and not be frustrated by the impracticality of calling or conducting a meet­ing in the manner prescribed by the Com­pany's articles and the Companies Act.................... (13) 

Unlawful Gain was Fraudulent and the Illegal

Exdebito Justitiae

The entire transaction of the landed prop­erty was fraudulent and the illegal and was done to secure unlawful gain to petitioner No. 1. Fraud vitiates everything. Besides, in such a case, the corporate veil is to be lifted to find out the real culprits and to undo the misdeed for ends of justice, in order to obviate harassment by dragging the company to multiplicity of proceedings, particularly when the cause of actions are inseperable and the cancellation of the fraudulent acts and deeds are inescable consequence of the court's order setting-aside the illegal allotment of shares......... (13)