Bangladesh Shilpa Bank

 

 

Bangladesh Shilpa Bank (Direct Sale of Mortgaged Property) Rules, 1980

 

Rules 3, 4 and 7(3)-

Sale of Mortgaged Property-irregularity in holding sale-Mere irregularity in holding a sale of mortgaged property by public tender does not divest the Bank of its power to sell the property by private negotiation. Irregularity in sale notice calling for public tender or non-compliance with other Rules in case of sale by private negotiation have no effect on the sale.

Fair Tech Limited vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 42 DLR (AD) 216.

Rules 5 and 7(3)-

It cannot be laid down as a general rule that a sale by private negotiation will be invalid because the auction process that began has not been exhausted. When sale by private negotiation takes place and the matter is brought to the Court, the question for consideration should be whether there was any malafide or lack of proper consideration for the transaction.

New Ideal Engineering Works Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank and ors. 45 DLR (AD) 138.

Rule 8-

The BSB authority is not empowered either to extend the time for deposit or accept the bid money deposited beyond time.

Paniraj and Company Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank, and another 52 DLR 621.

Bangladesh Shilpa Bank Order [PO 129 of 1972)

Article 33 –

The special proceedings under special law (PO No. 129 of 1972) shall proceed independently under the provisions of that special law irrespective of whether there is any other pending proceeding under any other ordinary law instituted earlier or later than the special proceeding-Section 10 CPC shall not be attracted to the two proceedings even though subject-matter and parties may be the same.

The special proceedings under special law (PO No. 129of1972) shall proceed independently under the provisions of that special law irrespective of whether there is any other pending proceeding under any other ordinary law instituted earlier or later than the special proceeding-Section 10 CPC shall not be attracted to the two proceedings even though subject matter and parties may be the same.

Therefore, section 10 CPC cannot have any application in the case of proceedings of different nature. Yet the Appellate Division additionally approved the stay of subsequently-filed Title Suit under the ordinary law on the ground of identity of subject matter not in exercise of powers under section 10 CPC, in our opinion, but in exercise of powers under section 151 CPC, in order that the proceedings under the special law are given an unhindered passage in the interest of justice.

Ahmed Silk Mills Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 42 DLR 140.

Article 33 –

The Shilpa Bank Order under which the Shilpa Bank was established-Made special provisions for quick realisation of loans from the loanees–Otherwise the financial· and economic interests of the country will suffer.

Bangladesh Shilpa Bank vs Bangladesh Hotels Ltd 38 DLR (AD) 70.

Articles 33, 34 and 35-

Bangladesh Shilpa Bank Order, 1972 is a protected legislation under the Constitution. No provision of the Order shall be deemed to be void or unlawful on the ground of inconsistency or repugnancy to any provision of the Constitution. Any of the Articles can be resorted . to by the Bank and may even be combined and it is not incumbent upon the Bank to take recourse to Article 33 at the first instance before proceeding under Article 34.

New Ideal Engineering Works Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 42 DLR (AD) 221.

Articles 33, 35-

The demand made by the respondent No. 2 was not the 'dues' recoverable under Article 35 of PO No. 129of1972.The BSB Order made no provision to determine the dues. It can simply make a claim and such a claim can be enforced under Article 33 of the Order. A claim when admitted or determined under any statutory provision or by a competent court can be termed as dues recoverable under Article 35 of the BSB Order. The certificate officer, without being satisfied, issued the notice for realisation of the amount claimed.,

Manaco Lab Ltd vs General Certificate Officer 42 DLR 159.

Article 34, clause (5)-

When the Shilpa Bank takes over management and administration of any industrial concern under clause (5) of Article 34 no court shall entertain any case as against such taking over or pass any prohibitory injunction order, etc. The above quoted clause (5) clearly means that where the Shilpa Bank has taken over the management and administration, etc or transferred any property in exercise of its power under clause (I) of Article 34, such taking over, transfer shall not be called in question before any Court.

Messrs Moon Light Silk Mills Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 38 DLR 438.

Article 34(1)-

Sale of mortgaged property­ Power of the Bank to take over management and administration of the borrower's concern and to sell its property are independent and alternative powers to enforce repayment of loan-it may be necessary for practical reasons to take over a concern before putting it to sale but that does not mean that the taking over cannot take place afterwards before completion of sale.

Fairth Limited vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 42 DLR (AD) 216.

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.