DISTRICT: SYLHET
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
HIGH COURT DIVISION
(CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION)
CIVIL REVISION NO. OF
2011
An
application under Section 115(4) of the
Code of Civil
Procedure.
And
IN
THE MATTER OF :
A
son
of ,
Village:
Police
Station:
District:
Sylhet
........ Plaintiff/ Petitioner.
-Versus-
B
Son of,
Vill-
Police Station:
District: Sylhet.
And
IN THE MATTER OF :
Judgment and decree dated 6.04.2011
passed by the
District Judge, Sylhet in
Civil Revision No.291 of 2011 in which
the learned District
Judge allowed the
appeal on contest and thereby confirming
the judgment and decree dated 6.11.2010
passed by the Assistant Judge, Sylhet in
Title Suit
No.98 of 2010 in which the
learned Assistant Judge, decreed the
suit on
defendant’s favor.
Application valued
at Tk………..
Suit valued at
Tk…………………
To
Mr.
Justice Md. Muzammel Hossain, the Chief Justice of Bangladesh and his Companion
Justices of the said Hon’ble Court.
The
humble petition on behalf of the above
named petitioner most respectfully,
S H
E W E T H :
1.
That this revisional application arises out
of Judgment and decree dated 6.04.2011 passed by the District Judge, Sylhet in Civil
Revision No.291 of 2011 in which the learned District Judge allowed the appeal
on contest and thereby confirming the judgment and decree dated 6.11.2010
passed by the Assistant Judge, Sylhet in Title Suit No.98 of 2010 in which the
learned Assistant Judge, decreed the suit on defendant’s favor.
2.
That it is stated that the petitioner as
plaintiff filed a suit in the court of Assistant Judge, 1st Court,
Sylhet as a Title Suit No. 98 of 2010 for a decree of perpetual injunction. But
the opposite party filed an application for local investigation of the suit
property and the learned court was pleased to allow the same.
3.
That being aggrieved by the order of the
Court of Assistant Judge, Sylhet the plaintiff-petitioner filed an application
before the Court of District Judge, Sylhet but the learned trial court was
pleased to reject the same by affirming the order of the Assistant Judge
without considering the facts and evidences, oral or documentary, provided by
the plaintiff and therefore it is illegal, fraudulent, collusive and without
jurisdiction.
4.
That it is stated that the learned trial
Court without consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case decreed
the suit in favor of the defendant.
5.
That it is submitted that the lower
Appellate Court committed an error of law resulting in an error of decision
occasioning failure of justice and as
such the judgment and decree passed by the lower Appellate Court is wholly
illegal, malafide and as such liable to be set aside.
6.
That being aggrieved by and dissatisfied
with the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court, the petitioner begs
to move before your Lordships on the following amongst other,
G R
O U N D S
I.
For that the judgment and decree passed by
the lower Appellate Court is bad in law as well as in facts.
II.
For that the learned Appellate Court below
committed an error of law in decreeing the suit on defendant’s favor without
any basis in evidence on record.
III.
For that the plaintiff-respondent who is
claiming injunction in respect of the suit land had only mentioned the khatian
number and dag number and quantity of land but no boundary of the said land
upon which the injunction had been sought by meets and bounds and it is a
settle principle of law as stated in 55 DLR (HCD) P. 564 that in order to get
an order of injunction the property in dispute should be clearly identified
with specific area and demarcation and in the instant case both the Courts
below had committed an error of law resulting in an error of decision by
allowing an injunction in favour of the defendant and as such the judgment and
order passed by both the Courts below
are liable to be set aside.
IV. For
that it is a settle principle of law that an injunction without previous notice
to the opposite party is a deviation from the ordinary course of justice and
should not issue without strong and grave reason as such the judgment and order
passed by both the Courts below are wholly illegal, malafide and as such liable
to be set aside.
Wherefore,it is most humbly prayed that your
Lordships
would graciously be pleased to call
for the records, grant leave for revision
and
issue a Rule calling upon the defendant-
opposite party to show cause as to
why the
Judgment and decree dated 6.4.2011 passed
by the District Judge,
Sylhet in Civil Revision
No.291 of 2011 in which
the learned District
Judge allowed the appeal on contest and
thereby confirming
the judgment and decree
dated 6.11.2010 passed by the Assistant
Judge, Sylhet
in Title Suit No.98 of 2010 in
which the learned Assistant Judge, decreed
the
suit on defendant’s favor, and after
hearing the parties, cause shown, if any,
make the Rule absolute and/or pass such
other or further order or orders as to
your
Lordships may seem fit and proper.
And
Pending hearing of the Rule your Lordships
may kindly
stay all further proceedings of the
Title Suit No.98 of 2010 now pending in the
Court of learned Assistant Judge.
Affidavit
I,
A, Son of…….of, vill- …..Police station-…….,District- Dhaka…..Aged about-…by
faith-muslim, by occupation- Business, by nationality- Bangladeshi do
hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows :-
1. That
I am the petitioner of the suit and am fully acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case and am fully competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That
the above mentioned statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Prepared
in my office
…………………. ………………….....
Advocate Deponent
The
deponent is known to me
And identified by
me.
……………………
Advocate
Solemnly
affirmed before me by
The
said deponent at the Court Premises
On
this the …th day of…….,2011 at 11.30
A.m.
No comments:
Post a Comment