Supreme Court Judgments, Summarised

by Barrister Tahmidur Rahman | Nov 3, 2026

Summary

The petitioner applied to the High Court Division under article 102 of the Constitution challenging an auction notice dated 27.08.2025, issued by respondent No. 3 under section 12(3) of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 and published in a daily newspaper, inviting tenders for the sale of mortgaged properties. A Rule Nisi was issued on 16.09.2025. When issuing the Rule, the Court directed the petitioner to pay 10% of the total outstanding amount within two months and the remaining outstanding amount within one year in four equal instalments, and ordered that in default the Rule would stand discharged and the order of stay would stand vacated. Respondent No. 4, Social Islami Bank Limited, Demra Branch, Dhaka, sought discharge of the Rule for non-compliance. No one appeared for the petitioner. The Court found that more than three months had passed without the petitioner paying the directed amount or filing an affidavit of compliance, so the Rule stood discharged by operation of the default clause and the stay was vacated.

Issues

  1. Whether the Rule stood discharged where the petitioner failed to make the payments ordered as a condition when the Rule was issued.
Key points

  • When issuing the Rule, the Court had directed the petitioner to pay 10% of the total outstanding amount within two months and the balance within one year in four equal instalments, failing which the Rule would stand discharged.
  • The petitioner did not pay the directed amount or file an affidavit of compliance in the more than three months after the order.
  • By operation of the default clause, the Rule stood discharged and the order of stay stood vacated.
  • The office was directed to make the necessary noting of the discharge of the Rule Nisi.

After passing the order on 16.09.2025 more than 3(three) months time has been elapsed, but the petitioner did not pay the directed amount through installments or caused to file affidavit of compliance in pursuant to the Court’s order dated 16.09.2025.

From the judgment, Justice Sardar Md. Rashed Jahangir
Law considered

Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003, section 12(3)Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, article 102

Call the Dhaka office+880 1708 000660WhatsApp · message usMessage our team
Message TRW on WhatsApp