Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (HCD)



Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance, 1982
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation Head Note Parties Name Reference/Citation
Sections 7 and 8 (d) and (f)

Constitution of Bangladesh
Article 102 read with
Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance [II of 1982]
Sections 7 and 8 (d) and (f)
When an amount claimed is not admitted amount or not a statutory amount, the writ under Article 102 of the Constitution is not maintainable.
The writ petition at instance of a ‘tenant’ who is not an owner of the land acquired in L.A. case itself is not maintainable.
The High Court Division observed that the petitioner claimed compensation on different heads is a repetition which gives the High Court Division a clear picture that there is no admitted amount as it has been claimed by the petitioner by that petition. In the decision of Water Development Board vs. Shamsul Haq reported in 51 DLR (AD) 169 Mr. Justice Mostofa Kamal (as his Lordship then was) in clear terms observed that when an amount claimed is not admitted amount or not a statutory amount, the writ under Article 102 of the Constitution is not maintainable. Further it would lead to a deplorable consequence if a tenant under the owner of a land which has been acquired by the government be allowed to put forward any claim under Article 102 of the Constitution. In the decision of Ismail Hossain Poshari and another vs. District Land Acquisition Officer and others 57 DLR (AD) 173 reference of arbitration in terms of section 28 of the Ordinance, 1982 has been spelt out. One can place his grievance, if so advised, under the said section of the Ordinance. On the High Court Division’s own discussions and findings as above the High Court Division is of the view that this writ petition at instance of a ‘tenant’ who is not an owner of the land acquired in L.A. case itself is not maintainable. This writ petition should be discharged only on that score. In the result, the Rule is discharged. Md. Abdul Mannan Miah. -Vs.- Bangladesh, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Land and others (Spl. Original) 2019 ALR (HCD) Online 151 ....View Full Judgment

Md. Abdul Mannan Miah. -Vs.- Bangladesh, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Land and others 2019 ALR (HCD) Online 151
Section 17 Sub-Section I

Sub-Section I of Section 17 of the Ordinance provides that no property acquired by the Government shall, without prior approval of the Government, be used for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was acquired. The Ordinance coming into force on 13.4.82 and having not being given retrospective operation, cannot hit the contract earlier concluded with the Plaintiff. Pronab Kumar Chakraborty and Others Vs. The Govt. of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh and others, 14 BLD (HCD) 2

Pronab Kumar Chakraborty and Others Vs. The Govt. of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh and others, 14 BLD (HCD) 2
Section 34(3)

Whether a revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is maintainable in respect of the judgment passed by the Arbitration Appellate Tribunal. In view of the decision reported in 38 DLR (AD) 172 Member Appellate Tribunal in deciding the appeal over the decision of the Arbitrator exercised a judicial function and as such he is a Court and for that matter his decision is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction. Khaled Akbar vs Government of Bangladesh 42 DLR 66.

Khaled Akbar vs Government of Bangladesh 42 DLR 66
Sections 43 and 44

Exclusion of jurisdiction of a civil Court should not be readily inferred. If the order passed or action taken by any authority is malafide, such court shall have jurisdiction to entertain a suit to see whether the action is in conformity with the law in question. Soleman Bibi and ors. vs ·Administrator, Farajikandi Complex and ors 45 DLR 727.

Soleman Bibi and ors. vs ·Administrator, Farajikandi Complex and ors. 45 DLR 727
Section 47

Mutation, Water Development Board, the (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948, Deputy Commissioner, cancellation of mutation, repealed, স্হাবর সম্পত্তি অধিগ্রহণ ও হুকুম দখল আইন, ২০১৭ (The Act, 2017), valid acquisition, acquisition of the property:
That there being no decision of the Government for acquisition of the property in question, there is no valid acquisition of the property and in the meantime the said proceeding having become non-est due to repeal of the said section 47 of the said Ordinance, 1982, there is no further scope to take decision for acquisition of the property. ...East West Property Development (Pvt.) Ltd. & anr. Vs. D.C Manikgonj, (Civil), 13 SCOB [2020] HCD 40 ....View Full Judgment

East West Property Development (Pvt.) Ltd. & anr. Vs. D.C Manikgonj 13 SCOB [2020] HCD 40
Section 47

The provision give life to all proceedings and matters including all notices, notifications and orders relating to requisition and acquisition of any property under the (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948 "as if that Act had not ceased." Abdul Bashar (Alhaj), being dead his legal heirs (a) Hosne Ara Begum & others vs Bangladesh and others 48 DLR 553.

Abdul Bashar (Alhaj), being dead his legal heirs (a) Hosne Ara Begum & others vs Bangladesh and others 48 DLR 553