Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD)



Artha Rin Matter
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation Head Note Parties Name Reference/Citation
Judgment and decree passed

Judgment and decree passed by the Artha Rin Adalat was not maintainable–– The Appellate Division held that it is now well settled that a writ petition challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Artha Rin Adalat was not maintainable and moreover, respondent No.1 as defendant No.4 contested the suit. Such a decree can only be challenged by filing an appeal within the statutory period of limitation on depositing 50% of decretal amount. .....Agrani Bank =VS= Mrs. Hosne Ara Begum & another, [1 LM (AD) 334] ....View Full Judgment

Agrani Bank =VS= Mrs. Hosne Ara Begum & another 1 LM (AD) 334
‘Prescribed’ means––

‘Prescribed’ means–– ‘Prescribed’ would mean prescribed by law. In the facts of the instant case the ‘prescribed rate’ was amended more than once since 01.04.2004. .....M/S. Rajib Traders =VS= Artha Rin Adalat & another, [1 LM (AD) 186] ....View Full Judgment

M/S. Rajib Traders =VS= Artha Rin Adalat & another 1 LM (AD) 186
When collusion and fraud

When collusion and fraud have been established and illegal order/direction and decrees have been obtained from the Court Appellate Division cannot its eyes forward to undo the wrongs by setting aside the illegal decree–– When collusion and fraud have been established and illegal order/direction and decrees have been obtained from the Courts, this Court cannot shut its eyes and remain a silent spectator. This Court must come forward to undo the wrongs by setting aside the illegal decrees. This Apex Court has the duty and obligation to rise to the occasion in order to do substantial and complete justice. Since collusion and fraud affect the solemnity, regularity and orderliness of the proceedings of the Courts, this Court, in exercise of its extra-ordinary power, is authorised to set aside the decrees obtained illegally by collusion. The learned Judges of the High Court Division have issued an absolutely illegal order directing the Artha Rin Adalat to decree the suits in a specified manner which has eroded the confidence of the litigants to the suits and will have the effect of undermining the credibility of the judiciary as whole. Accordingly, the leave petition is disposed of. The judgments and decrees dated 16.10.2017 passed by the Artha Rin Adalat No.3, Dhaka in Artha Rin Suit Nos.382 of 2016 and 1618 of 2016 are set aside. The Adalat is directed to proceed with both the suits in accordance with law. The Rule issued in Contempt Petition No.239 of 2019 is hereby discharged. …National Bank Limited =VS= M.R. Trading Company, [7 LM (AD) 216] ....View Full Judgment

National Bank Limited =VS= M.R. Trading Company 7 LM (AD) 216
50 lacs as damage and compensation

50 lacs as damage and compensation penalising the bank–– The High Court Division found that the exigencies demanded an expeditious disposal of the proposal made by the plaintiff company for sale of some of the land mortgaged with the bank with a view to salvaging the plaintiff Mills, and hence, since the bank did not act promptly, it should be made liable to pay Tk. 50 lacs to the plaintiff company. The High Court Division felt that had the bank taken prompt action with regard to the proposed sale of the land then the bank’s loan could have been managed preventing litigation between the parties. .....W. Rahman Jute Mills Ltd. =VS= Rupali Bank Ltd., [3 LM (AD) 499] ....View Full Judgment

W. Rahman Jute Mills Ltd. =VS= Rupali Bank Ltd. 3 LM (AD) 499