Let us now consider whether a Hindu widow is entitled to get the same share as a son. In this connection reference may be made to section 3 of the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act, 1937 (XVIII of 1937). Sub section (1) of section 3 of the said Act says that when a Hindu governed by the Daya Bagha School of Hindu Law dies intestate leaving any property dies, his widow, shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section(3), be entitled to the same share as a sons. Sub-section (3) of section 3 of the said Act further says that any interest devolving on a Hindu widow shall be the limited interest known as a Hindu Woman’s estate, but she shall have the same right of claiming partition as a male owner. Further sub-section (2) of section 1 of the said Act stipulates that it extends to the whole of Bangladesh. Thus from reading of the aforesaid provisions of subsections (1) and (3) of the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act, 1937 it is clear that the widow during the period of her life time she became complete owner and co-sharer of the property and this sub-section 3(3) has the effect of putting the widow in the same position as a son in the matter of claiming partition. ...Probir Kumar Dey@ Saiful & anr Vs. Shipra Rani Dey & ors, (Civil), 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 154 ....View Full Judgment

A Hindu widow or a Hindu woman having life interest can maintain a suit for partition:
If a Hindu widow or a Hindu woman having life interest is not allowed to pray for partition of the joint properties by metes and bounds, then she would be deprived of enjoying her such right, as in the absence of partition by metes and bounds, she would not be able to enjoy her life interest therein. And if it is held that a Hindu widow or a Hindu woman having life interest would not be able to file a suit for partition, then the other co-sharers of the joint properties may use such decision as lever against such Hindu woman and thus create obstructions in the enjoyment of her life interest in the joint properties. Therefore, we find no substance in the point that plaintiff No.1 not being a co-sharer in the suit khatain and having life interest only could not maintain the suit for partition. And we hold that a Hindu widow or a Hindu woman having life interest can very much maintain a suit for partition for the fullest enjoyment of her such right in the joint properties. .....Md. Abdus Sattar Miah =VS= Sreemati Raman Sona Dashya & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 220] ....View Full Judgment

Imposition of Cost
We find from the judgments of the High Court Division that seizure of gold ornaments from a citizen of Bangladesh is not authorised by customs law and there is no breach of any prohibition or restriction of Customs Act. The High Court Division found the seizure of gold ornaments to be mala fide and illegal and as such we do not like to consider the question of imposition of costs in the facts of the present case. Every public official must act within the four corners of law. [Para-6] Collector of Customs Vs. Shammi Ahmed & Ors. 7 BLT (AD)-240

Interest of Public Revenue
Customs duty—Personal guarantees
—Held: We have, inter alia, observed that personal guarantee is a very weak and uncertain security which should be avoided in the best interest of public revenue. (Para-4] Commissioner of Customs & Ors Vs. SARC Enterprise 7 BLT (AD)-366.

Appellate Court failed to consider the legal aspect of the case and had abruptly the finding of the trial Court– The learned Judge of the Single Bench of the High Court Division held the view that the findings arrived at by the trial Court having been rested upon consideration and discussions of the evidence and materials on record and also on a correct and proper analysis of the legal aspect involved in the case but the Appellate Court below failed to consider the above legal aspect of the case and had abruptly allowed the appeal and set-aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court without adverting to the finding of the trial Court which appears to him that those are nothing but misreading and non-consideration and misappreciation of the evidence on record. .....Sree Moti Lata Biswas =VS= Md. Abdul Majid, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 144] ....View Full Judgment