Section-3
The suit property was inherited by plaintiff and defendant No.1 from Haridash Roy Chowdhury. Plaintiff is the widow of Haridash Roy Chowdhury and defendant No.1 is her step son—the plaintiff is entitled to partition, even though she has only life interest in the property left behind by her husband. [Para- 14]
Bina Roy Chowdhury Vs. Amullya Roy Chowdhury & Ors. 7 BLT (HCD)-8O
Imposition of Cost
We find from the judgments of the High Court Division that seizure of gold ornaments from a citizen of Bangladesh is not authorised by customs law and there is no breach of any prohibition or restriction of Customs Act. The High Court Division found the seizure of gold ornaments to be mala fide and illegal and as such we do not like to consider the question of imposition of costs in the facts of the present case. Every public official must act within the four corners of law. [Para-6]
Collector of Customs Vs. Shammi Ahmed & Ors. 7 BLT (AD)-240
Interest of Public Revenue
Customs duty—Personal guarantees
—Held: We have, inter alia, observed that personal guarantee is a very weak and uncertain security which should be avoided in the best interest of public revenue. (Para-4]
Commissioner of Customs & Ors Vs. SARC Enterprise 7 BLT (AD)-366.