Bangladesh Rin Salishi Ain, 1989

Section 13-

The impugned order was coram non judice having been passed by the Chairman of the Board alone without the presence and participation of other members.

Salim (Md) vs AC, Land and Chairman, Debt Settlement Board and others 54 DLR 72.

Bangladesh Rin Salishi Ain, 1989

 

 

Section-7

Section 7 of the Act conceives that a vendor who is a cultivator can get benefits of It only when the sales are on account of natural calamities or helplessness on account of inability to maintain livelihood. [Para-7]

Subodh Chandra Saha Vs. Komol Krishna Saha & Ors 7 BLT (AD)-379

 

Section-7

Rin Shalishi Boards including that for Bauphal P.S. were constituted by a Gazette Notification dated 27 May. 1989—the appellant defendant filed this application

before the Board on 18.5.90—the High Court Division upheld the findings of the courts below that the application under section 7 of the Act was banned by time.

Held : An application cannot be presented to the Board unless the sitting of the Board, actually takes place after the collector concerned notifies about the place, date, and time of the sitting of the Board—on 4.1.90 from which date the Board started functioning—the application of the defendant under Section 7 of the Act was not time barred. [Paras-lO & 11]

Alhaj Ali Sardar Vs. Mohammad Ismail Howladar & Ors. 6BLT (AD)-120

 

Section- 19

The cases of the respondent No. 2 were dismissed by the Rin Shalishi Board, the competent authority to decide the alleged grievance and then he went to the appellate authority, Additional District Magistrate under section 19 of the Act and he being the final authority also dismissed the appeals. Respondent No. 2 cannot move again a fresh for the same relief to the alternative forum since his grievances have already been decided finally by the appellate authority. [Para- 13]

Md. Shamsul Alam Vs. Upozila Magistrate & Ors. 6 BLT (HCD)-214.

Bangladesh Rin Salishi Ain 1989

 

Bangladesh
Rin Salishi Ain 1989 (Xl Of 1989)

 

Section—13

The
Rin Salishi Board will be constituted for each Upazila (now thana) by Gazette
Notification consisting of one Chairman and not less than two members but not
more than four members. In the instant case, the impugned notice was coram non
judice having been passed by the Chairman of the Board alone in the absence of
other members. When the order complained of itself suffers from inherent lack
of jurisdiction, non-compliance with the alternative remedy of appeal does not
bar a writ petition in the High Court Division.

Mohammad
Salim v. Assistant Commissioner of Land and Chairman Debt Settlement Board and
others, 22 BLD (HCD) 475.

 

Bangladesh Rin Salishi Ain, 1989

Bangladesh Rin Salishi Ain, 1989 [15 of 1989]

 

Section-7

Section 7 of the Act conceives that a vendor
who is a cultivator can get benefits of it only when the sales are on account
of natural calamities or helplessness on account of inability to maintain
livelihood.

Subodh Chandra Saha Vs. Komol Krishna Saha &Ors 7BLT (AD)-379

Section-7

Rin Shalishi Boards including that for Bauphal
P.S. were constituted by a Gazette Notification dated 27 May, 1989—the
appellant defendant filed his application before the Board on 18.5.90—the High
Court Division upheld the findings of the courts below that the application
under section 7 of the Act was barred by time— Held : An application cannot be
presented to the Board unless the sitting of the Board, actually takes place
after the collector concerned notifies about the place, date, and time of the
sitting of the Board—on 4.1 .90 from which date the Board started
functioning—the application of the defendant under Section 7 of the Act was not
time barred.

Alhaj Ali Sardar Vs. Mohammad ismail Howladar & Ors. 6BLT (AD)-120

Section-
19

The cases of the respondent No.2 were dismissed
by the Rin Shalishi Board, the competent authority to decide the alleged
grievance and then he went to the appellate authority. Additional District
Magistrate under section 19 of the Ain (Act), and he being the final authority
also dismissed the appeals. Respondent No. 2 cannot move again a fresh for the
same relief to the alternative forum since his grievances have already been
decided finally by the appel1ite authority.

Md. Shamsul Alam Vs Upazila Magistrate & Ors. 6BLT (HCD)-214