Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
Government and Local Authority Land and Building (Recovery of Possession) Ordinance, 1970 | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
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.
|
Md. Nurul Amin -Vs.- Dullah Miah @ Dulal Miah @ Md. Ibrahim (Dulla) and others | 10 ALR (AD) 237 |
Section 5 |
Challenging the notice bearing No.DEO/ Dhaka/Eviction/BG Mia/5162/1117 dated 30.11.1995 issued by the present petitioner i.e., the Deputy Commissioner, Railway Land and Buildings, Bangladesh Railway, Dhaka directing the respondent No.1 to vacate plot No.97 of Mouza Kawranbazar within seven days–– It transpires that the Housing and Public Works Department has supported the case of the writ petitioner respondent that it allotted the land in question to the writ petitioner-respondent on 30.07.1995, handed over the possession of the same on 04.10.1995 and executed the lease deed on 04.11.2004 being lease deed No.6852 and ultimately on 03.03.2021, i.e., during pendency of this appeal classified the said property as industrial commercial plot.–– Further, from a certificate of possession dated 10.7.1993 (additional paper book dated 04.11.2018, filed by the writ petitioner-respondent) we find supports that the possession of the land in question was handed over to the Public Works Department-3, on 18.01.1960 by the Additional Land Acquisition Office, Dhaka. Further, after getting lease the writ petitioner-respondent has mutated his name and has been paying rent to the Government regularly.–– Appellate Division have no other option but to agree with the above findings of this Division and this Division is also of the view that there is no scope to evict the writ petitioner-respondent by issuing a notice under section 5 of the Ordinance 24 of 1970. .....Bangladesh Railway =VS= Abdul Huq, (Civil), 2022(2) [13 LM (AD) 216] ....View Full Judgment |
Bangladesh Railway =VS= Abdul Huq | 13 LM (AD) 216 |