| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 8 1963 SLD 8 1963 PLD 472 |
Dacca High Court
Writ Petition No. 60 of 1961, decision dated: 19th March 1962
SATTAR AND SIKANDAR, ALI, JJ
M. H. Khondkar and Abdus Sobhan for Petitioner. Maksumul Hakim Advocate-General and A. H. Mirza for
Respondents
Writ Petition No. 60 of 1961, decision dated: 19th March 1962
SATTAR AND SIKANDAR, ALI, JJ
M. H. Khondkar and Abdus Sobhan for Petitioner. Maksumul Hakim Advocate-General and A. H. Mirza for
Respondents
Haji ALTAFUDDIN KAZI
VS
THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN AND others
Law: East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 (XXVIII of 1951)
Section: 3,44
(a) East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 (XXVIII of 1951), S. 44 read with S. 3-Section 3 not an Exception to S. 44-Provisions explained. Section 3 embodies a provision for acquisition of rent-receiving interest and section 44 contemplates acquisitions of all acquirable interests including those of rent receivers which have been left out after acquisition under section 3. There is nothing to indicate that section 3 is either a proviso or an exception to section 44 the two sections contain parallel provisions and any one can be availed of for acquisition of rent-receiving interests. Section 44 cannot be read to embody a general rule to which section 3 is an Exception. Macbeth v. Ashley Law Reports Scotch Divorce Appeals Cases Vol. II (1875) p. 352 considered. (b) East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 (XXVIII of 1951), S. 3-Person not a "rent-receiver" must assert that status-[Mohar Ali and another v. The Province of East Pakistan and another P L D 1958 Dacca 17 distinguished]. (c) East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 (XXVIII of 1951), S. 3 (4)-Does not purport to require specification of "interests" of "rent-receivers"-[Nawab Sir K. G. M. Faroqui v. The Province of East Bengal and another (1957) 9 D L R 174 ref.] (d) Interpretation of Statutes-Power given by way of Exception does not do away with general provisions. In exercise of a power provided for by way of Exception, the general provision in a statute cannot be done away with or completely given a go-by. JUDGMENT SATTAR, J.---This Rule was issued on the opposite-parties to show cause why a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ of like nature should not issue directing them to forthwith withdraw, cancel and/or rescind the notice dated the 4th April 1961, proclaiming that Sripur Hat would be settled by public auction. 2. It is said that the petitioner, being in ownership and khas possession of the Sripur Hat in its 14 annas 10 gandas share, dedicated the same as a Public Wakf by a registered deed dated the 7th of January 1955, and has been holding the same in khas possession as the" Wakif Mutwalli". The Province of East Pakistan, in spite of the general…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492