GENERAL OBSERVATION

Because of anomaly between sub section 1 and sub section 2 of Section 155 of the Companies Act. 1994 the real spirit behind the said provision is being frustrated. Instead of bringing improvements, the amendment of Section 105C of the Companies Act. 1913 to its present position, has rather created confusion.

M. Islam Vs. Al-Rajhi Hospital (Pvt.) Limited & Ors.11 BLT(HCD)-474.

General observation

We are of the opinion that if a judge of this Division is elevated to the Appellate Division it should not be on the basis of seniority alone rather it should be on the basis of seniority cum merit. The hard reality is that the quality of the judges of Division, though are of a satisfactory level, all are not equal. Some are more brilliant may be left behind and the less competent may be elevated to the Appellate Division simply because he was appointed a judge of this Division at an earlier point of time than the others. This will have the following effect on the highest judiciary: firstly the most brilliant judges may be left behind though they could make better contribution to the judiciary. Secondly, if seniority-cum-merit becomes the criterion then right after the appointment of a judge in this Division he will do his best to improve the quality of his judgment and his overall performance as a judge and there will be a sense of competitiveness among the judges in performing their judicial duties. This will immensely benefit the nation as a whole and the judiciary in particular and the most meritorious will move ahead the less meritorious. The judges of his Division will then leave no stone unturned to devote themselves whole heartedly to the job day in and day out during the tenure of their office.

S.N. Goswami & Ors. Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh & Ors. 11 BLT(HCD)-213

General Observation

No litigant has a right to lay fraudulent, shady, ill motivated and untenable proceeding in a Court of law when those cases are throttling the functioning of Justice dispensation system which itself is groaning under unbearable arrears and backlogs. For blameworthy conduct of these types of unprincipled and dishonest litigants compensatory cost is to be awarded upon them.

Purobi Rani Barmani Vs. Shohrab Hossain & Ors 11BLT(HCD)-496.

General Observation

[Trade Marks Act, 1940 Section-23]

Ride 23 of the Trade marks Rules, provides an important safeguard for proper functioning the provisions of the Trade Marks Act. Unless this provision is properly complied with in its real spirit the whole procedure of granting registration of a trademark will in a chaotic condition,

M. A. Taher Sikder Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks & Ors. 9 BLT (HCD)-194

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.