Extinction of easement right
When the servient heritage of the subject- matter of the easement is so permanently altered by change of its character that the dominant owner can no longer enjoy the easement, the easement right in the property in question is totally extinguished.
Osi Meah Sowdager Vs. Tulsidham Akherer & Ors. 10 BLT (HCD)-391
License means, in essence, possession or enjoyment, without passing any interest in the property to which it relates, which could be otherwise wrongful.
Md. Nurul Haque Vs Mst: Anowara Begum & Ors 13 BLT (HCD)31
East Bengal Emergency Requisition of Property Act, 1948 Section-4
Service of notice—In matters o1 requisition for the purpose of acquisition notice is mandatory—the government requires to serve notice upon the occupant or the owner. That having not been done the so called acquisition and requisition is without jurisdiction.
M. A. Razzaque Vs. Ministry of Land 6BLT (HCD)-95
Sections-5(1), 5(3) and 5(7)
Notice was issued under section 5(1) sometime in 1967-68 and final acquisition was made by a notification dated 20th July, 1983 under section 5(7), there is no time limit prescribed for final acquisition under section 5(7), but there should be proximity between the date of notice under section 5(1) and that under section-5(7).
Bangladesh Vs. Luxmi Bibi & Ors. 2BLT (AD) 182
In the present case, the land was requisitioned for the purpose of permanent acquisition and possession was taken long back and the purpose for which it was requisitioned has been completed. In such a case the doctrine of legitimate expectation will have no bearing. This delay of gazette notification under Section 5(7) of the Act by itself will not ipso facto give any right to the writ petitioners to get release of the land from requisition.
Govt. of Bangladesh & Ors. Vs. Abdul Wahab Mia & Ors. 7BLT (AD)-169
The Government is competent to with draw any property from acquisition and release to the original owner in exercise of the power conferred by Section 8B of the Act only before the payment of compensation and not after it.
Shah Ekramur Rahman Vs. Sec. Ministry of Land & Ors. 3BLT (HCD)-35
Plea of bar of suit—ex parte decree set aside by the High Court Division of finding that the disputed land was acquired long ago and due notification was made in the Gazette— Appellate Division refrained from interfering with the judgment of the High Court Division. Contention was raised that ex parte decree was not in accordance with law.
Alfu. Miah and Others Vs. Bangladesh 1BLT (AD)-25.