Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh

ALL A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z



Government Local Authority Land and Building (Recovery of Possession) Ordinance [XXIV of 1970]
Section/Order/Article/Rule/Regulation Head Note
Section 5(1)

Since the Government having granted lease to the petitioner at a subsequent stage, and the lease never having been cancelled by the Government, the petitioner acquired valid and lawful right in respect of the land in question and this right, interest and possession of the lease hold property cannot be disturbed at the instance of a stranger.
The Appellate Division observed that the High Court Division, upon accepting the submission of the learned Advocate for the petitioner that there was no break in respect of the possession of the petitioner in the case land, made the Rule absolute declaring that the impugned order of eviction was issued without lawful authority and is of no legal effect. Moreso, since the Government having granted lease to the petitioner at a subsequent stage, and the lease never having been cancelled by the Government, the petitioner acquired valid and lawful right in respect of the land in question and this right, interest and possession of the lease hold property cannot be disturbed at the instance of a stranger. Appellate Division also note that admittedly the writ petitioner has been living in the property in question from the time when his father was the lessee, and he is still in possession. Admittedly added respondent No.6 and Md. Nurul Islam never got possession. Moreover, the writ petitioner has since been granted lease by the authority concerned. Hence, there can be no question of evicting him.
Md. Nurul Amin -Vs.- Dullah Miah @ Dulal Miah @ Md. Ibrahim (Dulla) and others (Civil) 10 ALR (AD) 237-239 ....View Full Judgment