Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
Companies Rule, 2009 | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
Rule 6 |
As already stated hereinbefore, it appears that Dr. Naimur Rahman died on 26.12.2007 leaving behind a widow, three sons and a daughter and of these heirs: widow and a son are already on record in Company Matter No. 26 of 2006 as petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. In Company Matter No. 137 of 2005, wife of Dr. Naimur Rahman is already on record as petitioner No.2. Therefore, the respective company matter did not abate as a whole. It further appears from the applications for substitution that the cause was shown as to the delay in filing the applications beyond 90 (ninety) days of the date of the death of Dr. Naimur Rahman. Manzurur Rahman vs. Dr. Naimur Rahman (Md. Abdul Wahhab Miah J) (Civil) 11 ADC 593 |
Manzurur Rahman vs. Dr. Naimur Rahman | 11 ADC 593 |
Rule 8 |
Companies Act [XVIII of 1994]
|
Mr. Mohd. Abdul Wadud -Vs.- The Heaven Homes Private Limited represented by its Chairman Mr. Kohd. Abdus Salam and others | 2019 ALR (HCD) Online 382 |
Rule 8 |
After the Companies Rules came into force, the Hon’ble Judges of this
Court started to show their inclination towards entertaining application
for non-compliance/violation of any provision of the Companies Act, even
though the said provisions of the Companies Act do not license an aggrieved
person to take recourse to the Company Court. ... So, in order to avail the
provisions of Rule 8 of the Companies Rules, a petitioner requires to show
the Court that a provision or provisions of the Companies Act has or have
been breached. ...Engr. Md. Anwar Hossen Vs. Chittagong Club Ltd & ors.,
(Civil), 15 SCOB [2021] HCD 60
|
Engr. Md. Anwar Hossen Vs. Chittagong Club Ltd & ors. | 15 SCOB [2021] HCD 60 |