দেউলিয়া বিষয়ক আইন, ১৯৯৭
Section- 2 (X), 5(1), 9(1)(S), 10, 110 r/w
The Financial Institutions Act, 1993
Section- 2(j)
Maintainability of the Dewlia Suit–
The order dated 28.04.2000 passed by the Dewlia Adalat in Dewlia Suit No.27 of 2000 rejecting the plaint is set aside. The Dewlia Adalat is directed to proceed with the suit and dispose the same in accordance with law. The question of maintainability of the suit shall be decided along with the other issues at the trial of the suit. .....Shinepukur Holdings Ltd. =VS= Abdur Rashid Chowdhury & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 162] ....View Full Judgment

It appears that the petitioner failed to reimburse the loan in due time in spite of several letters issued by respondent No. 2. The petitioner also admitted that he failed to repay the loan. The petitioner also failed to assign any ground in support of the contention that under section 28 the plaint of the respondent No. 2 was liable to be rejected. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Ali Rizvi (Md) vs Bankruptcy Court and Additional District Judge and another 10 BLC (AD) 112.

In an application under Section 28(b) of the Act the defendant in a bankruptcy suit must undisputedly satisfy the Court that he has sufficient ability to repay the debts for which he stands guarantee on behalf of the loanee and that he is not a willful defaulter. Merely because he stands as guarantee he is not entitled to an order for dismissal of the suit. 5
Emdadul Haque Bhuivan Vs. Bankruptcy Court & Ors 8 BLT (AD)-175.

Bankruptcy Suit-Cannot be dismissed on prayer of the defendant—
Disputed question of fact cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. Whether the loanee has ability to repay the loan money is a disputed fact which can be adjudicated by the Bankuruptcy court. The suit cannot be dismissed on the prayer of the Gaurantor, defendant.
Emdadul Haque Bhutyan Vs. Bankruptcy court, Narayangonj and another. 5 MLR (2000) (AD) 297.

In an application under section 28(b) of the Act the defendant in a bankruptcy suit must undisputedly satisfy the Court that he has sufficient ability to repay the debts for which he stands guarantee on behalf of the loanee and that he is not a willful defaulter. Merely because he stands as a guarantee he is not entitled to have an order .for dismissal of the suit. Emdadul Haque Bhuiyan Vs The Court of District Judge & Bankruptcy Court, Narayangonj, subsequently on transfer the Court of Bankruptcy and Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Narayangonj and another, 21 BLD(AD)119.