Post no-121

হাইকোর্ট পারমিশন লিখিত পরীক্ষা প্রস্তুতি ২০২৩-২০২৪

Civil-Question No-01 (Civil Part):

‘A’ instituted a suit against ‘B’ in the 1″ Court of the Joint District Judge, Dhaka, praying for declaration of title to the suit property. ‘A’ claimed the suit property by way of inheritance. On the other hand, ‘B’ claimed the same by way of purchase from one of the co-sharers of ‘A’. The Joint District Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that ‘A’ was an attesting witness to the deed of transfer executed in favour of B’ in respect of the self-same property. Draft a Memorandum of Appeal for presentation to the High Court Division of the Bangladesh Supreme Court.

(11″ February 2006, 15″ March 2013 & 2017)

(প্রশ্নটি বাংলায় (দেওয়ানী): ‘ক’ নালিশী সম্পত্তিতে স্বত্ত্ব ঘোষণার প্রার্থনায় ‘খ’ এর বিরুদ্ধে ঢাকার ১ম যুগ্ম জেলা জজ আদালতে একটি মামলা দায়ের করিলেন। ‘ক’ উত্তরাধিকারসূত্রে নালিশী সম্পত্তি দখল করেন। অপর পক্ষে ‘খ’ এর সম্পত্তি ‘ক’ এর একজন সহ-অংশীদার হইতে ক্রয় সূত্রে দাবী করেন। বিজ্ঞ যুগ্ম জেলা জজ মামলাটি এই কারণে খারিজ করিয়াছেন যে একই সম্পত্তি হস্তান্তরের জন্য ‘খ’ এর অনুকুলে সম্পাদিত বিক্রয় দলিলে কে’ একজন সত্যায়নকারী সার্থী ছিলেন।

সুপ্রীম কোর্টের হাইকোর্ট বিভাগে উপস্থাপন করার জন্য আপীলের একটি মেমোরেন্ডামের খসড়া প্রস্তুত করুন।                      (১১ই ফেব্রুয়ারী ২০০৬, ১৫ই মার্চ ২০১৩ এবং ২০১৭).

Repeating same question

over and over

(শুধু নাম-ধাম, ঠিকানা, জেলা কোট ও রায় ও ডিবির আদালত পরিবর্তন করে বার বার আসে, মূল মামলার প্রকৃতি একই আলীশের মেমোরেন্ডামের একটি খসড়া প্রস্তুত)

Kamal instituted a suit against Jamal in the 1″ Court of Joint District Judge, Dhaka praying for declaration of title to the suit property. Kamal claimed the suit property by way of inhentance. On the other hand, Jamal claimed the same by way of purchase from one of the co-sharers of Kamal. The Joint District Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that Kamal was an attesting witness to the deed of transfer executed in favour of Jamal in respect of the self-same property. Draft a Memorandum of Appeal for presentation to the High Court Division of the Bangladesh Supreme Court.

(11″ February 2006, 30 November 2007, 25th June 2010 & 2017).

(প্রশ্নটি বাংলায় (দেওয়ানী): কামাল জামালের বিরুদ্ধে ঢাকার ১ম যুগা জেলা জজ আদালতে একটি দেওয়ানী মামলা দায়ের করিলেন, কামাল উত্তরাধিকার সূত্রে নালিশী সম্পত্তি দাবী করেন। অন্য দিকে জামাল ঐ একই সম্পত্তি কামালের একজন সহ-অংশীদারের নিকট হইতে ক্রয়সূত্রে মালিক মর্মে দাবী করেন। বিজ্ঞ যুগা জেলা জজ এই কারণে মামলাটি খারিজ করিয়া দেন যে ঐ সম্পত্তি বিষয়ে জামালের বরাবরে সম্পাদিত হস্তান্তর দলিলে কামাল একজন সত্যায়নকারী সাক্ষী ছিলেন। বংলাদেশ সুপ্রীম কোর্টের হাইকোর্ট বিভাগে উপস্থাপন করার জন্য আপীলের মেমোর একটি খসড়া তৈরী করুন।

(১১ই ফেব্রুয়ারী ২০০৬, ৩০শে নভেম্বর ২০০৭, ২৫শে জুন ২০১০ এবং ২০১৭).

-G R O U N D S-

1. For that the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Court, Dhaka is bad in law as well as in facts and as such

II. For that the learned trial Court did not consider the facts, circumstances and evidence on record oral and documentary and most arbitrarily dismissed the suit and as such the judgement and decree cannot be sustained in law.

III. For that the learned court below failed to conceive that the plaintiff-appellant is an illiterate person and taking advantage of this he was mislead by the defendant-respondent in respect of the nature, character and contents of his deed and Kamal /’A’/Kahım signed the deed under wrong impression without his free will.

IV. For that the learned court below committed gross illegality failing to conceive that the suit property had not been partitioned by metes and bounds and as such the sale deed of Jamal/ B’/Farid was not valid and as such the learned Court below arrived at an illegal decision occasioning failure of justice.

V. For that the learned Joint District Judge, 1 Court, Dhaka committed gross illegality in dismissing the suit without applying judicial mind.

VI. For that the learned trial Court gave his judgment without application of judicial mind and as such interference by this Hon’ble Court is necessary.

VII. For that the learned Court below misread and misunderstood the pleadings and as such the judgement and decree is liable to be set aside.

VIII. For that the learned Joint District Judge, 1^st Court, Dhaka with due consideration of actual facts, circumstances and evidences on record and pleading of the parties ought to have allowed the

IX. For that the judgement and decree passed by the learned trial Court is bad in law as well as violation of Principle of natural Justice as such the judgement and decree is liable to be set aside.

X. For that the learned Joint District Judge, 1 Court, Dhaka was wrong in dismissing the suit merely on the ground that the plaintiff appellant was an attesting witness to the Deed of transfer executed in favour of the defendant respondent in respect of the self same property without considering the merit of the case

XI. For that the learned trial Court recorded deposition of the plaintiff side and the plaintiff proved plaint case and corroborated other witnesses in despite of the Court dismissed the suit most illegally, arbitrarily and as such the impugned Judgment and decree cannot be sustained in law.

XII. For that the learned Court below failed to conceive that the suit land is sufficiently described in the schedule.

XIII. For that the learned trial Court relied his Judgment on the evidence of the defendant rather than the plaintiff and as such his Judgment and decree is liable to be set aside.

XIV. For that the learned trial Court should have to consider that the defendant did not support his case by any neutral evidence except him.

XV. For that in any other view of the matter the learned trial court ought to have decreed the suit.

XVI. For that in any other view of the matter the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 1 Court, Dhaka is not tenable in the eye of law and as such the same is liable to be set aside.

XVII. For that the Judgment and decree neither is proper nor in accordance with law.

XVIII. For that there are other good grounds for allowing the appeal setting aside the impugned judgment and decree. Hence, the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be set-aside.

Or,

For that the other grounds will be urged at the time of hearing of appeal.

List of papers: /List of documents:

1. This Meno of Appeal. Or The Memorandum of Appeal,

2. Vokalainama.

3. Certified copy of Judgment and decree.

4. Hon’ble Second Judge’s Copy.

• Facebook
• YouTube
• WordPress