DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHAKA Vs. ABDUL HAKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave at the instance of Government defendants is directed against the judgment and order dated 11-6-2000 in Civil Revision No. 1365 of 1997 passed by the High Court Division making the Rule absolute.

(2.) The plaintiff respondent No.1, Abdul Hakim filed Title Suit No. 60 of 1993 in the court Assistant Judge, First Court, Dhaka praying for permanent injunction against the defendant Government of Bangladesh and other Government Officers restraining them from entering into the 'Ga' Schedule land part of the 'kha' schedule which is out side the land acquired in L.A. Case No. 13 of 1956-60. The plaintiff also made further prayer for declaration that "Ga' schedule land is not the part of acquired land published in the Gazette Notification dated 18-12-1980. The case of the plaintiff respondent is that 3.60 acres of land out of 23.43 acres of C.S. Dag No. 253 in C.S. Khatian No. 217 of mouza Bisil within Mirpur Police Station, District Dhaka was originally owned and passed by one Pir Baksh. In the year 1935 the said Pir Baksh died leaving behind two sons Jonab Ali and Jinnath Ali and two daughters Samina bibi and Jarina bibi as his legal heirs; that the aforesaid legal heirs for their convenience made amicable partition of the land amongst themselves and thereby the plaintiff respondent Abdul Hakim the son of late Jonab Ali got 1.20 acres in his share which is more fully described in the 'kha' schedule of the plaint and the respondent Abdul Hakim got his name mutated and had been owning and possessing this land peacefully. The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh Acquired 14.70 Acres of land out of 23.43 acres in L.A. Case No. 13 of 1959-60 and Abdul Hakim (respondent) received compensation money for .92 decimals and hence 28 decimals of land in the share of the said plaintiff respondent remained unacquired and over 12 decimals of land of Abdul Hakim was left unused after construction of the roads surrounding it. The respondent Abdul Hakim clamed to have been owning and possessing 40 (28+12) decimals of land and this portion was not actually acquired in L.A. Case No. 13 of 1959-60.

(3.) The defendant appellants by filing written statement contested the suit contending inter alia that the suit land was acquired in L.A. Case No. 13 of 1959-60 and Government took over possession of the same; that for acquisition the plaintiff respondent Abdul Hakim was given compensation money and received the same in full; and he got rehabilitation plot allotted for him. The further claim of the appellants that the plaintiff's suit is barred under Section 14, sub-section (1) of the (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948.