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



Arpito Shompotti Pratyarpan Ain (অর্পিত সম্পত্তি প্রত্যর্পণ আইন)/ Transfer of Vested Property Act
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation Head Note Parties Name Reference/Citation
Section 5(2), 6

অর্পিত সম্পত্তি প্রত্যর্পণ আইন, ২০০১
Section-5(2), 6
Direction-(h), The Government may take necessary measures by enacting law in respect of properties which were vested to the Government and where institution have already been developed for the purpose of the development of the country may be named after the name of the original and lawful owner. Regarding direction-(h)-Appellate Division’s considered view is that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to the legislature to enact a particular legislation. Same is true as regards the executive when it exercises the power to make Rules, which are in the nature of sub-ordinate legislation.
This Act i.e. Act of 2001 covered issue of compensation vide section-5(2) and proviso of section-6. The term ‘sufficient and just’ depends upon the criteria, location, etc. of the property which will be determined by the concern department of the Government. Relating to enactment of law, Appellate Division already expressed their views while discussing direction-(h) of the High Court Division. It appears that the Government enacted a law, Act of 2001 (Amended in 2013), to dealt with the vested properties fairly and reasonably in accordance with the law. As such, there is no necessity to issue directions upon the Government regarding the vested properties. .....Ministry of Land, Bangladesh =VS= Md. Abdul Hye, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 1] ....View Full Judgment

Ministry of Land, Bangladesh =VS= Md. Abdul Hye 12 LM (AD) 1
Section 9(6)

The Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 143 (1) (c) r/w
Arpito Shompotti Pratyarpan Ain, 2001
Section 9(6)
Permanent lease– The predecessor of the appellants are in possession of the homestead of Shachida Nanda Sarkar from the year 1960 and from the evidence it appears that such possession was not denied by the Government, respondent Nos.1-2. Since appellants and their predecessors are/were in possession of the homestead of Shachida Nanda Sarkar since long, Appellate Division is, therefore, of the view that the landed property belonged to the appellants i.e. homestead of Shachida Nanda Sarkar measuring 3(three) bighas, the appellants for ends of justice would be entitled to have permanent lease because the predecessors of the appellants were refugees to take shelter came from India. The lease money would be Tk.1,00,000/- (Taka one lac) only. .....Khandakar Nurul Islam(Md.) =VS= Deputy Commissioner, Panchagarh, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 60] ....View Full Judgment

Khandakar Nurul Islam(Md.) =VS= Deputy Commissioner, Panchagarh 12 LM (AD) 60