Abandoned building–
|
Abandoned building–
The High Court Division in exercise of its writ jurisdiction cannot sit as
a court of appeal over the judgement of the Court of Settlement for
re-settling the questions of fact. In that case also the Court of
Settlement on consideration of the materials on record arrived at a finding
that the petitioner in that case was not the daughter and heir of the
original lessee and that she had not been in possession of the house in
question at the relevant time. The respondent failed to prove her claim to
be the heir of the original allottee and also that the building was
unlawfully declared abandoned. She could not prove that she was in
possession of the building. The Court of Settlement, having called the
relevant records for the building in question, came to a finding that the
building was in the possession of the Government and declared it as having
been lawfully declared as abandoned property. We find merit in the appeal,
which is accordingly allowed, without however, any order as to costs. The
impugned judgement and order of the High Court Division is set aside.
.....Government of Bangladesh =VS= Musammat Amikun, (Civil), 2018 (2) [5 LM
(AD) 1]
....View Full Judgment
|
Government of Bangladesh =VS= Musammat Amikun |
5 LM (AD) 1 |
Abandoned property–
|
Abandoned property–
The disputed property was enlisted in the ‘Ka’ list of the abandoned
properties so it is to be presumed that the same was enlisted rightly and
the Government has been possessing the same. The onus is upon the writ
petitioner to prove that the same is not an abandoned property.
The materials on record, it is apparent that writ petitioner Md. Tarique
Sultan never appeared before the Court and those three persons namely,
(1)Rashed Zahid, (2)Firoza Begom and (3) Shamsun Nahar, creating some
documents, attempted to get the disputed valuable property released
Facts clearly questioned the identity of the writ petitioner. Though the
papers produced in the High Court Division were highly doubtful, the High
Court Division, ignoring those aspects, erroneously believing the papers
released the property, in question. The civil for leave to appeal is
disposed of. …Ministry of Works, Bangladesh =VS= Tariq Sultan(Md.),
(Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM (AD) 200]
....View Full Judgment
|
Ministry of Works, Bangladesh =VS= Tariq Sultan(Md.) |
7 LM (AD) 200 |
Abandoned property–
|
Abandoned property–
The High Court Division only could interfere with the finding of the Court
of Settlement, if could be shown that the tribunal had acted without
jurisdiction or made findings upon no evidence or without considering any
material evidence causing prejudice to a party or it had acted malafide or
in violation of any principle of natural justice. The High Court Division
has failed to appreciate any such lacking in the judgment of Settlement
Court. …Murtuza Shah(Md.) =VS= Ataharul Haque, (Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM
(AD) 158]
....View Full Judgment
|
Murtuza Shah(Md.) =VS= Ataharul Haque |
7 LM (AD) 158 |
Abandoned property–
|
Abandoned property–
The High Court Division found that the certificate issued by the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, the competent authority proved that the property
is not an abandoned property. The High Court Division observed that the
Government did not file any affidavit-in-opposition controverting the
statements made in the writ petition and, as such, it could safely be
presumed that the appellants had accepted the statements made in the writ
petition.
The Court of Settlement held that there was no evidence whatsoever oral or
documentary to prove the oral gift by Mr Dossani in favour of Mrs Gulbanu
on 1-7-1962. In order to prove the oral gift, the writ-petitioner filed an
affidavit sworn by Mr Dossani on 13-10-1971 (Annexure-D to the writ
petition). Having gone through the affidavit, we find that this affidavit
was sworn before a Magistrate at Karachi, Pakistan then an enemy country at
war with Bangladesh. There is no explanation for the long gap of 9 years
between the alleged oral gift and the affidavit.
The findings arrived at and the decision made by the Court of Settlement
have been based on proper appreciation of materials on record.
But the findings and decision made by the High Court Division having not
been based on proper appreciation of materials on record call for
interference.
We find substance in this civil appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed
without any order as to costs and the impugned judgment delivered by the
High Court Division is set aside and the judgment and order passed by the
Court of Settlement is restored. …Ministry of Works, Bangladesh =VS=
Abdul Mannan(Md), (Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM (AD) 323]
....View Full Judgment
|
Ministry of Works, Bangladesh =VS= Abdul Mannan(Md) |
7 LM (AD) 323 |