Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
Banking Companies Ordinance (LVII of 1962) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
Section 27(1) |
The Cabinet Committtee further decided in the same meeting that there shall be no further extension of time limit to complete formalities by the writ petitioner. The Bangladesh Bank accordingly, informed that the proposed Sundarban Bank International Ltd. did not reach the stage at any time for applying for licence to commence banking business. This letter was neither addressed to the writ petitioner nor a copy of the same was endorsed to him and it is also not an order rather it was a reply made in compliance with the query made by the Ministry of Finance by Annexure-O to the writ petition. Moreover, the impugned Annexure-Q being a reply by the Bangladesh Bank in reply to query made by the Ministry of Finance and uncommunicated to the writ petitioner in the process of reaching decision in the matter, it did not create any legal right in favour of the writ petitioner. Bangladesh Bank vs M Habibullah Bahar 12 BLC (AD) 87. |
Bangladesh Bank vs M Habibullah Bahar | 12 BLC (AD) 87 |
Section 62 |
Banking Companies Ordinance—winding up order made—Transfer of a pending case from civil Court to the Company Judge is not a matter of course—A matter pending before the High Court Division or Appellate Division on appeal cannot be transferred to the Company Judge. Kanak Chandra Das and others Vs. Basiruddin Khan and another; 1 BLD (AD) 421. |
Kanak Chandra Das and others Vs. Basiruddin Khan and another | 1 BLD (AD) 421 |
Section 65 |
Claim for recovery of money by a Banking Company whether can be decreed in the absence of any evidence as to actual payment the amount—In view of the fact title deeds were deposited with the bank along with all other usual documents, executed by the predecessor of defendant the Company and gu1ar entries in the ledger and clean cash of the Bank in respect of the loan the claim is established—There is also admission x the Managing Director of defendant the company as to the liability to the Bank- Moreover there is presumption under the Neon able Instruments Act, Bankers Books of Evidence Act and Banking Companies Ordinance—Negotiable Instruments Act (XXV of ‘s I) S. 11 8—Bankers Book of Evidence Act XVIII of )891)S.4. Planters (Bangladesh) Ltd. Vs. Mahalaxmi Bank Limited and others; 5 BLD (AD) 150. |
Planters (Bangladesh) Ltd. Vs. Mahalaxmi Bank Limited and others | 5 BLD (AD) 150 |
Sections 66 and 72 |
Banking Companies Ordinance—Appeal—No appeal lies against an order not covered by section 72(1X2) of the Ordain e—Order under section 66(9) upon an application under section 66(1) not being covered by section 72(l)(2) is not appeal able— order passed on an application under non 66(1) cannot be held to be an order pass on an application under section 196(1) ii of Companies Act—Companies Act (VII 4i 1913) Ss. 196 and 202. Bangladesh Bank Vs. Debendra Nath Dutta; 1 BLD (AD) 431. |
Bangladesh Bank Vs. Debendra Nath Dutta | 1 BLD (AD) 431 |
Section 73 |
Bank's property-Articles of Association-Scheme of Arrangement-Director
-in-charge's power-Whether lease-deeds executed two weeks after expiration
of the Scheme of Arrangement are ultra vires the power of the
Director-in-charge.
|
Harun Moten vs Mahaluxmi Bank Ltd. | 41 DLR (AD) 8 |
Special procedure for computing the period of limitation for a suit filed
by a Banking Company facing liquidation.
|
Harun Moten vs Mahaluxmi Bank Ltd. | 41 DLR (AD) 8 |