Search Options
Judgment Advanced Search
Displaying 5781-5787 of 5787 results.
Kamal Uddin Vs. State, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
....commit any error in passing the impugned judgment and order. 15. In view of-the discussion made above we do not find any substance in the petition. The petition is dismissed. Ed. ......s submitted against two accused while final report was submitted against the rest including the petitioner and that the informant filed naraji petition against the said final report and also filed an application to the Government for further investigation of the case and the learned Magistrate ..Category: Criminal Law | Date: | Hits: 103
Ismat Zerin Khan Vs. The World Bank and others, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
.... order of the High Court Division and the trial Court is hereby directed to hear the suit on all issues including the issue regarding maintainability in accordance with law. Ed. ......ice of notice of the suit the defendant-World Bank appeared in Court on 23.03.2002 but did not file any written statement whereupon the suit was fixed for hearing exparte. When the defendant filed an application under Order VII rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 23.3.2002 for rejection of the..Category: Employment/Service Law | Date: | Hits: 211
Abul Kalam Azad Vs. Govt of BD, represented by the DC, Dinajpur & ors, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
....fter consideration of all the facts and materials exercised its discretion we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment of the High Court Division. The leave petition is dismissed. Ed. ......1 10 (con) of 1999 making the rule absolute. 2. The facts, in short, are that the judgment of the court of appeal below was delivered on 9.3.1998, decree was signed on 16.3.1998, the application for the certified copy was filed on 22.3.1998 and delivery was taken on 6.7.19..Category: Procedural Law | Date: | Hits: 133
Hamidul Huque, Managing Director, UCBL & anr Vs. Akhteruzzaman Chowdhury, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
....ered by the Court. 15. In view of the above, we find no cogent reason to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court Division. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Ed. ......contemner-appellants are the Managing Director and the Secretary respectively of the said Bank. It appears that on 18.01.2000 one Jahangir Alam Khan, a shareholder and a Director of the Bank filed an application under section 81(2) of the Companies Act, 1994 for holding of Annual General Meetin..Category: Business or Commercial Law | Date: | Hits: 118
Syed Ehsanul Hussain & ors Vs. Bangladesh House Building Finance Corporation, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
....ule. Since the High Court Division did not commit any error of law in the decision we are not inclined to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the leave petition is dismissed. Ed. ....... case failed to file written objection. The aforesaid Miscellaneous Case was fixed on 13.11.1997 for ex parte hearing. On that date the opposite party No. 1, petitioner Syed Ehsanul Hussain filed an application praying for time to enable him to file written objection but the prayer was not allowed...Category: Property Law | Date: | Hits: 110
Md. Nurul Hoque Miah Vs. Bangladesh, 2005, 34 CLC (AD)
....e respondent Nos.3 to 7 are set aside and it is directed that the cases of the petitioner and the respondent Nos.3 to 7 be sent again to the Public Service Commission for consideration for promotion afresh." 16. We have perused the decision in the light of the above submissions and are of the v......xes up to the rank of Commissioner of Taxes; that due to non compliance of the decree of the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, the appellant has suffered a huge financial loss which was given in his application by a detailed calculation. 8. Thereafter, the appellant filed execution case No.3/20..Category: Administrative Law | Date: | Hits: 162
Director of Housing and Settlement Vs. Abdul Majid Howlader & others, 2006, 35 CLC (AD)
....n Title Suit No. 191 of 1996 of the 2nd Court of Senior Assistant Judge, Dhaka is set aside. There is no order as to costs. Ed. This Case is also Reported in: 24 BLD (AD) 56, 9 MLR (AD) 73. ......y leave is against the judgment and order dated August 7, 2001 of a Single Bench of the High Court Division in Civil Rule No. 800 (condonation) of 2000 discharging the Rule which was obtained upon an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing revis..Category: Limitation Law | Date: | Hits: 189
332330326324323307303