Abul Kalam Azad vs. State Reference : 61 DLR (2009) 91 Facts : At the instance of the accused petitioner Abul Kalam Azad this rule is issued for quashing the proceedings of Metro Sessions Case No. 152 of 2007 arising out of CR case No. 2947 of 2006 under section 138 of the […]
Case Studies
Jafar Ullah vs Bangladesh
Reference : 66 DLR (2014) 380 Facts : Jafar Ullah the petitioner is the Area Chief of Naogaon Muktijodhya Welfare Club, a local branch of Bangladesh Muktijodhya Welfare Club. On 1-6-2013 he entered into a lease-agreement with Bangladesh Muktijodhya Welfare Club under which the Welfare Club gave him permission to conduct indoor games including Nipun […]
British American Tobacco Bangladesh Company Ltd vs Begum Shamsun Nahar
Case Title : British American Tobacco Bangladesh Company Ltd vs Begum Shamsun Nahar Reference : 66 DLR (AD) (2014) 80 Principle: Vicarious liability made applicable in this case for tort. Facts : The present respondent Shamsun Nahar was appointed as “Lady Confidential Typist” of the defendant-petitioner company on 1-1-1985. Since 1986, she was the […]
Jurisdiction of Local Court when the seat of Arbitration has not been determined
CASE STUDY SILKWAYS CARGO SERVIECS LIMITED vs MALAYSIAN AIRLINES SYSTEM AND OTHERS Reference: 1 LCLR [2012] HCD 402 Brief Statement of Facts: The present case arose when the Respondent, Malaysian Airlines System, refused to renew the General Sales Agent (GSA) Agreement of the Petitioner, Silkways Cargo Serviecs Limited. Under the Agreement the renewal […]
Disputed question of facts should be decided in trial not Writ
Shamsul Alam vs. State Reference : 60 DLR (2008) 677 Facts : The opposite party no. 2 as complainant filed a petition of complaint against the accused petitioner stating that the accused took loan for taka 5,00,000 from him to pay the same in time. Accordingly the accused issued a cheque for the said amount […]
Afil Jute Mills (Pvt) Ltd vs. Bangladesh
Afil Jute Mills (Pvt) Ltd vs. Bangladesh Reference : 58 DLR (2006) 208 Facts & Arguments : The Petitioner company obtained a loan by way of working capital for taka 29.40 crore to tide over the bad days and the aforesaid loan could not be repaid which was unfortunately accumulated to taka 79,13,42,887.12 inclusive of […]
