BEGUM LUTFUNNESSA Vs. BANGLADESH
SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This appeal by leave is from Judgment and Order dated 13 February, 1989 passed by the High Court Division (Dhaka Bench) in Writ Petition No. 316 of 1986 discharging the rule.
(2.) The appellant filed the aforesaid writ petition calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned notification dated 28.4.86 (Annexure 'E' to the Writ Petition) insofar as it relates to the appellant's house, at serial No. 41 under the heading 'Motijheel Commercial Area' shall not be declared to have been passed without lawful authority and be of no legal effect.
(3.) The appellant suited in her petition that she purchased the land measuring .70 acres with a two-storiyed residential house at holding No. 10/1 Toyenbee Circular Road, Dhaka pertaining to C.S. Plot No. 33, R.S. Plot Nos. 2411, 2412 & 2413 of C.S. Khatian No. 6147 (U) and R.S. Khatian No. 390 of Mouza Shahar Dhaka in 1951 to the extent of .66 acres and in 1955 to the extent of 6 acres by registered Sale Deeds and since then she had been enjoying and performing acts of ownership and possession by residing in the house and paying rents and taxes to the Government and other local authorities. The husband of the appellant was a politician belonging to the Muslim League Party. He was out of Bangladesh at the time of liberation of the country. The appellant's house at 10/1, Toyenbee Circular Road, Dhaka and her other properties were attached by the government of Bangladesh as collaborator's properties under The Bangladesh Collaborators (Special Tribunal) Order, 1972 (P.O. 8 of 1972) on the misinformation that these properties might belong to Mr. Wahiduzzaman, husband of the appellant. In view of the order of attachment the appellant had to vacate the said house and thereafter an investigation was made at the instance of the appellant with regard to the right title, interest and possession of the said house. The Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of Bangladesh, The respondent No. 3 by memo dated 9.10.1975 released the said property along with the appellant's other house at 2, Nanda Lal Dutta Lane, Dhaka from attachment. The release order is Annexure 'B'. The properties belonging to Mr. Wahiduzzaman were also released by The Govt. His citizenship was restored and he died in Bangladesh in 1976. The appellant received delivery of possession of the said property and afterwards leased it out to the Parjaton Corporation vide lease deed dated 9.12.76, Annexure 'C. The lease was terminated in 1980 and since then the appellant has been enjoying peaceful and undisturbed possession of the said properly through three of her sons, Habibuzzaman, Rashiduzzaman & Sinku Akramuzzaman who have jointly set up an office for their various businesses in the said house and have also been using part of it in storing equipments and other merchandise connected with their business. She asserted that the house had never been declared or treated as abandoned property nor taken possession of by the Govt. in any manner under the President's Order No. 16 of 1972. The appellant was surprised to see the public notice dated 28.4.86 published in The Bangladesh Gazelle Extra-ordinary on 28.4.86 under the provisions of section 5(1)(a) of the Abandoned Buildings (Supplementary Provisions) Ordinance, 1985 (Ordinance No. LIV of 1985) (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance) wherein the appellant's said house has been included in the said notice as an abandoned property the possession of which had allegedly been taken as abandoned property under P.O. No. 16 of 1972. The appellant asserted that she is in possession of the said house and the respondents or anybody else on their behalf have not taken possession of the said property nor served any notice to include the said house in the list of abandoned properties.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.