The Import and Export (Control) Act,
1950
Section 3(1)
The order states that the appellant has
not given any satisfactory explanation as to why there was a long gap between
the time of submission of bills of entry in November, 1989 and the physical
examination of the goods in February, 1990. Thus the revisional authority was
also of the view that the appellant him- self contributed to the customs
authori- ty's rejection of his prayer for chemical examination. Md. Morzul
Haque vs. Bangladesh (Mustafa Kamal J)(Civil) 3ADC 634
The Import Policy Order 1997-2002
Article 18, Clause 21, Section 20
Directing the respondents to issue
clearance permit in respect of 10 (ten) re- conditioned vehicles imported by
him within a period of 10 (ten) days from the receipt of the judgment.
The High Court Division is not, as a
matter of fact, to decide as to whether the import in question is of 5 years or
more than that as have been found by the authority entrusted upon to determine
the same nor could see how the discretion has been exercised by the authority
invoking section 21 of the Import Policy. Chief Controller, Import and Export
and others vs. Md. Faruk Ahmed (Mohammad Fazlul Karim J) (Civil) 4 ADC
308
Dispute between the parties being as to
whether Alam Gazi and Karimuddin together took settlement of the suit land on
5.10.1874 and that the plaintiff having proved the same on production of their
registered Kubulyat Exhibit-1 and the entry in the C.S. Khatian No. 30, the
learned Judges of the High Court Division erred in law in holding that the
others sons of Alam Gazi are entitled to the suit land in excess of what they
have inherited from Alam Gazi. The learned Counsel further submitted that the
learned Judges of the High Court Division failed to notice that C.S. Khatian
No. 30 records larger share in favour of the successors of Karimuddin in
comparison of these of Karamuddin which is on evidence of the fact that the
settement obtained on. 5.10.1874 by Alam Gazi an his son Karimuddin in equal
shares. The learned Counsel further submitted that the learned Judges of the
High Court Division have commit- ted an error of law in modifying the decree
passed by the learned Subordinate Judge on a wrong reading of the entry of C.S.
Khatian and the same is also "based on no evidence". The learned
Counsel further submitted that the plea of the benami to the effect that
Karimuddin was a name lender on behalf of Kutubuddin for obtaining the
settlement of the suit land on 5.10.1874 has no evidence on record to
stand and as such the judgment and decree passed by the High Court Division in
modifying the one passed by the Subordinate Judge is liable to be set aside.
Abdul Hakim being dead his heirs Abdul Gani and others vs. Rajob Ali being dead
his heirs Yusuf Ali and others (Mohammad Fazlul Karim (Civil) 4ADC 313
The Import Policy of 1997 to 2000
Section 20
To issue clearance permit in respect of
10 (ten) re-conditioned vehicles import- ed by him within a period of 10 (ten)
days from the receipt of the judgment. (1) Chief Controller. Import and Export
vs. Md. Faruk Ahmed (Mohammad Fazlul Karim J) (Civil) 5 ADC 123
