Afresh Suit:-
Sent back to the High Court Division for hearing afresh- The impugned judgment and order of the High Court Division is set aside. The revision is sent back to the High Court Division for hearing afresh and for disposal in accordance with law on the evidence on record. If so advised, the defendants may file the documents which were exhibited before the trial Court and were taken back by them. The High Court Division shall consider those documents, if filed, along with the evidence on record. But in no case the High Court Division shall send the case back to either of the Courts below. .....Abul Hossain -VS- Jiban Nessa, [3 LM (AD) 1]
Afresh Suit: Sent back to the High Court Division for hearing afresh- The High Court Division also failed to consider that mere passing of a final decree and its execution thereof shall not debar a defendant to file an application under Order IX, rule 13 of the Code if, in fact, summons was not served upon him and he was affected by the very preliminary decree. The High Court Division was also wrong in relying upon the principle of law laid down.
We find no other alternative but to send the revision back to the High Court Division for hearing afresh and for disposal in accordance with law on the basis of the evidence on record. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in the following terms: The impugned judgment and order of the High Court Division is set aside. The revision is sent back to the High Court Division for hearing afresh and for disposal on merit in accordance with law considering the evidence. ..... Masum Billah (Md.) =VS= Md. Saidur Rahman, [3 LM (AD) 268]
Suit Afresh- There is some formal defect in framing the suit the plaintiffs are permitted to withdraw from the suit with permissions to sue afresh The defect in the frame of the suit as pointed out in the application appears to us formal in framing the suit and because of such defect, the suit shall fail. Therefore, we find merit in the application and we are inclined to allow the same. The application is allowed. The plaintiffs are permitted to withdraw from the suit with permissions to sue afresh. The judgments and decrees of the Courts below as well as the impugned judgment and order are set aside. ...Zahanara Begum =VS= Motiar Rahman(Md), [7 LM (AD) 107]
Allotment of an Industrial plot in Mirpur Government Housing Estate for running business- We are of the view that since the appellants are in possession of the suit land by constructing factories and has been running business incurring huge expenses, though the appellants did not fulfill the conditions of the allotment letter, for ends justice, we are inclined to maintain the allotment of the appellants. The suit land is of such nature that the respondents will have to allot the suit land to someone else, if it is cancelled. So, ends of justice would be met, if the allotment of the suit land is maintained in favour of the appellants, because they had already made improvements of the suit land and constructed buildings as well as running business thereon. We are also of the view that further justice would be met if the appellants are asked to pay the present market price of the suit plot. In this case, the appellants have to pay the present market price of the suit land, not the price based on which the plot was allotted to them vide allotment letter dated 22.11.1980. The appellants are directed to pay a sum of Tk. 75,00,000.00 (seventy five lacs) as market value in respect of the suit land of the case within 06 (six) months from the date of this judgment. In default, the appeal shall stand dismissed... Begum Hosneara Alam VS National Housing Authority. [10 LM (AD) 174]
