Legal Notice

A legal notice is an important issue for various court proceedings when it is essential under statutory

provisions of law such as the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 stated on ‘cheque dishonour’ or cheque

bounce cases. In case of filing a case for cheque dishonor a legal notice to be served within 30 days from

the date of cheque dishonor with acknowledgement due (A/D) and the case must be filed within 30

days from the date of expiration of notice period. If the Payee refuses to receive notice, the period of

time shall be counted from the date of issuing notice with A/D. A legal notice may also be necessary for

demanding justice before filing writ petitions against Government authorities. It is essential for

purchasing land property or real estate to show ‘good faith’ of the purchaser.

Some important types of legal notice are given below (for practitioners and all as part of our online legal

teaching conducting by ain-qanoon.com for the interest of public in common) :

1. Legal Notice for cancellation of deed

2. Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour

3. Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour/ cheque bounce

4. Notice demanding Justice

5. Notice Demanding Justice

6. Reply to Legal Notice

7. Reply to Legal Notice

8. Notice claiming compensation and termination from office

9. Notice claiming compensation

10. Notice claiming rights

11. Notice for eviction of Tenant or cancellation of tenancy agreement

12. Notice claiming ownership/ possession/ lawful rights through power of attorney

13. Statutory Notice under section-169 of the Town Improvement Act

14. Notice on grievances of Club membership

15. Notice under the Company Act 1994 (AGM)

1. Legal Notice for cancellation of deed

LEGAL NOTICE

From:

Ahamuduz zaman

Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh.E-mail: azamanseu@gmail.com,Mobile:

01552455241.

On behalf of (Notice giver/ sender):

1. Md. Shohorab Hossain, Son of Md. Sader Ali Bepari and Hasena Banu,

And

2. Mosammat Runu Begum, Wife of Md. Shohorab Hossain, Daughter of Late

Sonamuddin Sarkar and Kulsum Begum

Both of whom address is Village- Tarakupi, Post Office Kataksthal, Post- Gournadi, District-

Barishal,

And Present Address: House No.2, Road No. 2, Block-B, Dalipara, Uttara, Dhaka-1230.

To: (Notice Recipient)

1. Kabir Ahmed, Son of Md. Aizar and Mosammat Diluara Begum, of Uttarkhan

Mollapara, Police Stataion-Uttarkhan, District- Dhaka-1230.

2. Motalib Hossain, Son of Md. Kaizul Islam and Mosammat Harisa begum, of Uttarkhan,

Post-Uttarkhan, P/S-Uttarkhan Majar Thana, , Upazilla- Uttarkhan, District-

Dhaka.1230.

3. Md. Ruhul Amin, Son of Md. Ataur Rahman and Mosammat Rubina Begum, of

Moushair , P/S- Dakkhin Khan, District- Dhaka.

4. Md. Borhanuddin , Son of Md. Kaizul; Islam, and Mossammat Rashida Begum of

Moushair Thana- Dakkhin Khan, District- Dhaka.

5. Md. Apan Hossain ( Babul), Son of Aziz Uddin and Mosammat Hashi Begum of

Uttarkhan, Post Office- Uttarkhan Majar, Upazilla- Uttarkhan, District- Dhaka,1230.

6. Md. Jamal Uddin, Son of Late Ashraf Ali and Mosammat Razia Begum of Uttarkhan,

P.O- Uttarkhan Majar, Thana- Uttarkhan, District- Dhaka-1230.

7. Hafizul Islam, Son of Md. Kaizul Islam and Haricha Begum of Uttarkhan,Post-

Uttarkhan , Thana- Uttarkhan, District- Dhaka-1230.

Subject: Legal Notice for cancellation of contract for sale/ By-na-nama signed on 11.5.2014 by

the above parties and registered as By-na-nama deed no. 6793, registered at Uttara, Dhaka

regarding the following scheduled property.

Dear Mr.Kabir Ahmed and Others (Notice Recipient 1 to 7)

I am hereby instructed and authorized by the above Notice Giver (owner of the scheduled

property) against you for declaration of cancellation of the by-na-nama./ contract for sale deed

signed and registered on 11.6.2014 and titled as deed no. 6793 effective for one year which was

expired on 11.6.2015.

From the above deed, it is clearly mentioned in page no.5 that the Notice Giver(s) / Owners of

the scheduled property agreed to sale the property to you for an amount of taka 34,70,000

(Thirty four lac and seventy thousand) and as you shown your interest to purchase the land, He

agreed to the above valued money of which subsequently you paid an amount of taka 6,50,000

(Six lac fifty thousand) on the date of signing the contract for sale. You all promised and

pledged to pay the rest amount of taka (34,70,000-6,50,000= 28,20,000) i.e. Twenty eight lac

and twenty thousand within one year from the date of signing and registering the contract for

sale. However, you did neither communicate nor shown your interest to pay the rest amount of

taka and to register a Sale deed/ Saf kabala deed within the stipulated time which is an utter

disregard to the agreement and in violation of the contract. The Notice Giver continuously tried

to communicate you personally and through phone due to transfer the scheduled property by

receiving the residue amount but all attempt failed due to your voluntary negligence and

showing no interest to pay the rest of the contracted/agreed amount without any lawful reason.

So, you are legally responsible for this circumstances as mentioned in the deed of contract for

sale in page no. 5 for which the contract stands cancelled and the owner of the scheduled land/

notice giver revokes their right over the land to not to sale to you anymore and to transfer it

lawfully to any other prospective buyer. As you have violated the contract and failed to pay the

money in due time, you can no longer claim any interest over the property and your money

stands forfeited as per the existing laws of the country.

Therefore, you are notified with this as follows:

1. The registered contract for sale/ by-na-nama deed no. 6793 dated 11.6.2014 stands

cancelled from issuing this notice of 12.6.2015 for violation of the terms and conditions

by you (notice recipients) as you have failed to pay the residue/ rest amount of taka

28,20,000 to the owner of the land (notice giver) within one year of signing and

registering the deed that expired on 11.6.2015;

2. As you have voluntarily violated the contract/ agreement your advance payment of taka

6,50,000 will be forfeited for such violation of the contract;

3. Due to your violation of the terms and conditions of the agreement, the owner suffered

huge loss and sufferings as he could not sell the property to other prospective buyer’s

during the pendency of the contract/ agreement of one year which is closed on 11.6.2015,

you are liable to face any civil or criminal cases whatsoever and also to pay

compensation with interests of an amount of taka 3,50,0000 (3 lac fifty thousand taka).

4. The notice giver / Owner of the land is entitled to sale the property to any one as the by-

na-nama remains invalid and illegal due to such violation of terms and conditions.

5. The Notice giver shall not accept any of your claim from now on due to the cancellation

of the by-na-nama deed and therefore authorized exclusively to the scheduled property to

transfer in any manner to any one for which you can not restrict in any manner and for

such of your illegal activities, you shall be answerable to the lawful courts and

authorities of Bangladesh.

This notice is given to you as per the existing laws and provisions of natural justice. I put my

hand hereto on behalf of the notice giver/ owner of the scheduled land as per the

authorization and one copy of which is kept in my office for future references and further

legal action (if any).

Schedule of the Property

District- Dhaka, Thana/ Upazilla- Uttarkhan, Sub-registry office, Uttara, Dhaka, JL No. C.S.

180, S A 20 , R.S. 3 and in Dhaka City Survey No. 23, Mouza- Nirni, Khatian No. C S 20, S A

24 , R S 24 and Dhaka City Survey No. 119. Dag No. Cs and S A 70, R S 90 and Dhaka City

Survey 823 and 827 of measuring total land 1155 (ajutangsha/part and parcel) in favour of no. 1

Notice giver is the owner of 0412.50 (ajutangsha) and no.2 notice giver is the owner of 742.50

(ajutangsha/part and parcel).

Signed and sealed by

Ahamuduz zaman, Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh, 01552455241/01717763964.

Chamber: H#2A,R#19,Sector-11,Uttara, Dhaka-1230.

CC: All Notice Recipient (Serial no.1 to 7 listed in the Contract for Sale deed no.6793 dated 11.6.2014).

2. Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour

LEGAL NOTICE UNDER SECTION-138 (B) OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881

WITH REGISTERED A/D

20 May 2005

On Behalf of:

Shofiqul Islam Esq.

Proprietor

M/s. Juevenile Construction

Alupatty, Ghoramara,

Rajshahi.

. . . . Notice Giver

To

Mr. Ashraful Huq Mithu

Propritor

Mithu Corporation

3/1 North Peerer Bagh

Mirpur, Dhaka

. . . . Notice Recipient

Dear Sir,

Sub: Legal Notice arising out of dishonored Cheque No. ABB/CD No. 2612665/34/04 dated 05.12.2004 amounting to Tk.12,00,000/- (taka twelve lac) only.

Mr. Shofiqul Islam, Proprietor, M/s. Juevenile Construction of Alupatty,

Ghoramara, Rajshahi is our client the (Notice Giver) who has forwarded to us with all

the relevant papers, documents, files etc. in relation to the captioned matter have

approached us with instructions to address you as under:

1. That our client the (Notice Giver), according to your requirements supplied soya

cakes used as raw materials of poultry feed and on receipt of your Cheque No.

ABB/CD No. 2612665/34/04 dated 05.12.2004 respectively for an amount of

Tk.12,00,000/- (taka twelve lac) only drawn on Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited,

Rokeya Sarani Branch, Dhaka-1209.

2. That on 05.12.2004 the above cheque was submitted by our client the (Notice

Giver) for collection to the Exim Bank, RAJUK Avenue Branch, Dhaka-1000 for

collection and the said cheque was returned unpaid on the same date because of

‘Fund not arranged for’.

3. That our client the (Notice Giver) tried to contact you the (Notice Recipient) over

the phone and mobile to which you did not called. Even representative of our

client the (Notice Giver) met you the (Notice Recipient) personally and

requested you to make necessary arrangement for the above amount. But

unfortunately all you had to state to our client the (Notice Giver) was that you

the (Notice Recipient) would be sending the said amount in cash on the same

day. But even then there was no such payment from you end. Again for the last

two months you have abstained yourself either from attending phone calls and

avoiding meeting our client’s representative sent to you physically.

4. That since you the (Notice Recipient) knowing fully well issued the above cheque

on due account maintained by you the (Notice Recipient) without keeping

sufficient fund there against and the said cheque was returned unpaid due to

insufficient fund and you the (Notice Recipient) have therefore virtually played

tricks with our client the (Notice Giver) and cheated him outright and as such

you have committed offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act,

1881.

In the premises aforesaid, we have instructions to call upon you the (Notice

Recipient), as we hereby do, to pay Tk. 12,00,000/- (taka twelve lac) only to our client

the (Notice Giver) within 30 (seven) days of receipt of this notice, failing which our

client the (Notice Giver) would be constrained to take such civil and criminal legal

actions against you, as may be advised and, the cost and consequences for which you the

(Notice Recipient) shall be held responsible.

A copy of this notice is kept in our office for further reference, if any.

With thanks.

Yours sincerely

_______________

(Kazi Rehan Nabi)

Barrister-at-Law

3. Legal Notice for Cheque Dishonour/ cheque bounce

Legal Notice

(With Registered A/D)

Ref: 002/10/2011 Dated: 27/6/2011

To Md. Touhidur Rahman House No.7A, Jafarabad Dhanmondi, Dhaka.

----------------Notice Receiver

From Adv Rifaz Uddin Advocate, Dhaka Judge Court Chamber: Dhaka Law House 22, Court House Street (2nd floor) Dhaka-1100

----------------Notice Giver

For and on behalf of Md. Abdullah Al Islam 39, Uttara, Dhaka-1230.

Dear Sir,

Being empowered with and instructed by my client I serve this aforesaid legal notice under section-138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act as follows:

1. That my distinguished client, Md. Abdullah is an honest, reliable and an established business man with good will and reputation.

2. That my client made a business transaction with you and at the time of this business affairs you the notice receiver handed over to my client a Cheque No.7987980 dated 25/05/2011 amounting Tk. 1,00,000/-(One Lac) drawn on Sonali Bank, Motijheel Branch, Dhaka in respect of payment for computer parts.

3. That the above cheque was placed for encashment in my clients current account with Sonali Bank on 12/06/2011 but the cheque in question was returned unpaid with remark “Insufficient Funds” and returned to my client on the same date.

4. That you, the Notice Receiver, is requested to make payment the said of Tk. 1,00,000/- (One Lac) within fifteen (15) days of the receipt of this legal notice, otherwise my client will adopt the appropriate legal proceedings against you under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and you will be liable for all costs and consequence thereof.

5. I, therefore, through this legal notice, considering the above facts and

circumstances, call upon you to come to the office and meet my client

within 7 (seven) days from the receipt of this legal notice, in the event

you fail to do so, I have clear instruction from my client to take

necessary legal action against you. In this event, you shall be liable for

all costs and consequences.

A copy of this legal notice is retained in my chamber for further use and reference.

Yours sincerely

________________________

Advocate Rifaz Uddin

4. Notice Demanding Justice

DEMAND OF JUSTICE NOTICE

1. Mr. Faruk Ahmed Siddique Secretary, Ministry of Education

Section-14, Govt. of People’s Republic of Bangladesh

Segun Bagicha, Ramna, Dhaka.

2. The Chairman University Grants Commission Bangladesh

Sher-E-Bangla Nagar,

P.S. Mohammadpur, Dhaka.

3. Mr. Justice (Retd.) Md. Fazlul Haque Barrister-at-Law

Former Judge of the Appellate Division

Suite No. 7C-2, Al-Baraka Tower,

252, Elephant Road, Dhaka.

08 March 2005

Dear Sirs,

Re: Notice Demanding Justice arising out of proceedings vide memo No. wkg/ kvt

14/8 †et we-10/2003/92 ZvwiLt 24/02/2005 issued by the Secretary, Ministry of

Education section-14, Government of Peoples the Republic of Bangladesh

for allegations of violations of various provisions specially provision as

contained in section-16 of Act XXXIV of 1992 as amended vide Act of 1998

relating to establishment/ control/ supervision and management of the

private universities including that of Queens University, situated at Abedin

Tower (7th Floor) 35, Kemal Ataturk Avenue, Banani, Dhaka-1213, thereby

clearly, adversely affecting our clients rights and interest as they are/ were

the students of the said Queens University.

Mr. Md. Shoib Shikder, son of Shahbuddin Shikder, House No. 22, Road No. 5,

Dhattapur, Tongi, Gazipur, Shah Md. Omar Sufian, son of Shah Md. Shahabuddin of 203/A,

Nawabpur Road, Dhaka and lastly Md. Latif Haider, son of Haji Md. Abu Abbas of 98 H. K.

Das Road, Dhaka-1100 are our clients, who have forwarded to us all relevant papers,

documents, said show cause notice dated 24.02.2005 upon the University, Articles &

Memorandum of Association, various notices of Government of the Peoples Republic of

Bangladesh and have approached us with instructions to address you as under:

1. That all our clients are ex-students of Queens University, have passed from the said upon obtaining Degrees in 2004 from the Department of C.S.E at present serving as C.T.O. (Chief Technical Officer), obtained LL.B Degree and presently in the final year of LL.M. and is practicing as an Advocate of the Judge Court, Dhaka and last such ex-student also practicing in the Judge’s Court, Dhaka obtained LL.B (Hons) and is presently simultaneously studying to complete Final LL.M Course.

2. That most of our clients are/ were meritorious students who secured high marks both at the S.S.C and H.S.C. examinations and then applied for admission in the Queens University and obtained degrees in LL.B and LL.M/ Computer Science conducted by the Queens University. Our clients paid high tuition fees amounting to several lacs in different semesters and those presently are serving in different organization and are practicing as Advocates as stated above in the District Judge Court.

3. That our clients now reliably understand that, on the basis of the prior enquiry reports dated 18.01.2001 of the University Grants Commission, addressed to the Registrar of the Queens University, Banani, Dhaka called upon them to fulfill certain conditions from Clauses (L-Q) on or before 31.01.2001, failing which, adverse

decisions could be taken against the said Queens University. 4. That after more than 9 years of granting of Charter of Queens University, it was

served with a show cause notice on 24.02.05 by the Ministry of Education alleging, inter alia, of violation of Rules and Regulations of Act, XXXIV of 1992 as amended, vide Act of 1998. The said allegations commenced from clause (K-R) of the said show

cause notice threatening cancellation of the Charter in the purported exercise of powers under section 16(1) of the said Act of 1992.

5. That the whole proceedings, on the face of it, are not only arbitrary, opposed to principal of natural justice, fundamental human rights but are also contrary to equity/ fair play for the simple reason, that the students both present and past persons who are/ were directly aggrieved/ affected of the said Queens University are/ were not given any notice to show cause and/ or opportunity to defend themselves as students of the said Queens University as were issued in the case of the Queen’s University, however, legally unsustainable.

6. That be as it may, the students both past and present are now studying or ex-students paying high tuition fees and that too on the basis and during existence and continuance of the charter granted to the Queens University on 25.02.1996 vide memo No. kvt 14/13 †et we-15/95/50-wk¶v and, hence, any cancellation of said charter

would put the careers of those past and students in total uncertainty and not only that completely shall ruin the future of the past and present students for no fault of their own.

7. That our clients have documentary proofs to suggest that all the allegations were denied by the Queens University as in the proposed reply to the said show cause notice.

8. That such arbitrary and high handed decision to cancel the charter under section 16 shall also affect the past students, who have already qualified/ obtained degrees from Queens University in as much as those ex-students are now already serving in the various the Govt. and Semi-Government Organizations, may lose their jobs or any future promotions and further that their prospects for going abroad for higher studies including for obtaining required VISA for going abroad shall be seriously prejudiced.

9. That a draft reply to the said show cause notice dated 24.02.2005 contents, inter-alia:

i) The allegation that the Queens University did not acquire/ purchase any lands

for constructing permanent building for the University is incorrect, in that the

University has already purchased more than required lands in the name of

the Queens University at Ashulia, Savar, Dhaka, the name and relevant details

of which have been already been informed to the relevant authority of Govt.

as well as to the University Grants Commission. In this connection, it may be

mentioned that in cases of several Universities, far from purchasing required

lands, are still running the private University on rented premises and that too

after expiry of 12/13 years from the date of obtaining the Charter.

ii. That the allegation, that it does not have required number of full time

Teachers are also wrong in that there are 34 full time teachers and further

that the University have already advertised for more teacher. The said

numbers of Teachers are far in excess of the statutory requirements.

iii) That the allegation regarding keeping of required number of books are also

denied by giving reasons for such denial.

iv) That the allegation that the Vice-Chancellor and the Treasurer were

appointed without the knowledge and permission of the Chancellor is

incorrect and that the proposals for such permission for the said posts are

still pending in the office of the Chancellor.

v) That the allegation that 5% students both male/ female were not afforded

with free of tuition are also incorrect. In fact 41% of the said male / female

students were now allowed to study without any tuition fees and with

sufficient financial waiver on an average.

vi) That Audits and the Accounts of the University are duly audited by the

prominent firm of Chartered Accounts which includes income tax audit as

well as per law.

vii) That M.A. (Final) in English and Executive MBA course were never opened in

the Queens University, although permission for such studies have been

applied for and are still pending permission by the Ministry of Education/

University Grants Commission, Bangladesh.

viii) Regarding allegations of having two campuses are untrue. In fact, the Queens

University has 3 campuses comprising of 25.5 thousand sq/ft. in excess of

huge original lands/ buildings on which the said university started functioning

in February, 1996 and as such the question of violation of section IV of Act,

XXXIV, 1992 does not arise at all.

ix) That the Queens University has much higher standard of education as

compared to many others including the 18 University mentioned herein

below:

1. World University

2. Royal University

3. South Asia University

4. Bangladesh University

5. Dhaka International University

6. Presidency University

7. City University

8. Prime University

9. IBAIS University

10. Uttara University

11. Victoria University

12. Eastern University

13. Millenium University

14. Atish Dipankar University

15. UODA University

16. Daffodil University

17. IUBAT University

10. That having regard to the explanation given above, refuting each and every

allegation for the reasons as stated, it is submitted that the very show cause notice

dated 24.02.2005 having been issued in violation of Section 16 of the Act No. XXXIV

of 1992 as amended in 1998, in as much as, only on 2 grounds and upon no other

grounds as alleged namely on complaint as to fraud or cheating in availing

certificates or for lower standard of education as prescribed under section 15, the

Chancellor into the complaint by a appointing a sitting or retired Judge of the

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court and only on the basis of which a notice to

show cause for cancellation of Charter. But in the instant case, a number of illegal/

irrelevant grounds have been introduced, just to get rid of/ or for cancellation of the

Charter of ours and six other of the universities and as such no action could be

contemplated on such “show-cause” which is violative of the said Section 16 by the

Ministry of Education themselves as referred to i.e. Section 16 of Act XXXIV of 1992.

For ready reference Section is reproduced herein below:

“16 Cancellation of Charter:

1. In case of receipt of complaint as to fraud of cheating in awarding

certificates or failure to maintain the standard of education as is

approved for that university under section 15, the Chancellor may

inquire into the complaint by appointing a sitting or retired judge of

the Supreme Court and if the charge is sustained in the said inquiry the

government may revoke the charter of that university.

Provided that the charter of the Non-Government University cannot be

abrogated under this sub-section unless a reasonable opportunity of

hearing has been given to the Founder.”

11. That the exercise of powers under the above noted section 16 must be based on any

“complaint” by concerned authority giving detailed particulars of such “complaint,”

which is totally absent in the instant case.

12. That the ingredients for drawing any proceeding under section 16 is absent totally as

stated above, hence the very appointment of Justice Md. Fazlul Huq to hold an

enquiry is misconceived / untenable under the said Act of 1992.

13. That before commencing any proceedings, a copy of the enquiry report by Hon’ble

Supreme Court Judge ought to have been served upon the university, so that the

University could make proper and effective representation against above

proceedings for cancellation of Charter under section 16.

14. That above proceedings is an eye-wash, having been proceeded with to cancel the

charter as a measure for political victimization.

15. That the careers of nearly 444 students of different studies shall suffer irreparable

loss and inquiry in that they would have no remedy to turn to for no fault of theirs.

Besides, those who have already received their degrees should also suffer untold

miseries both in job-market as well as social sectors. To prove this aspect of the

grievances, the undersigned reserve the right to produce those relevant documents.

16. That in days of sessions jam, advance disclosures of question papers lastly by that of

the P.S.C. question papers, the present allegations sounds irrelevant / minors.

17. That rules having not been framed defining “lower standard” within the meaning of

Section 16 the present show cause notice is misconceived.

18. That having regard to the various news papers/ news media, it is evident that the

Govt. have already decided to take action against the 7 Universities much ahead of

the above show cause notice and therefore, the present proceedings is an eye

wash;- inquisitions proceedings instead of enquiry proceedings.

In the premises aforesaid, we have instructions to call upon you, as we hereby do, to

withdraw/ cancel/ rescind all proceedings for cancellation of Charter of the Queens

University including that of proceedings commenced vide the said show cause notice dated

24.02.2005 which is both against law and constitution of the Peoples Republic of

Bangladesh and intimate compliance thereof on or before 11 of March 2005, failing which

our client reserve the right to move the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of Writ Petition,

with a suitable ad-interim orders;- the cost and consequences for which you shall remain

responsible.

A copy of this notice is kept in our chamber for further reference, if any.

With thanks,

Yours sincerely,

K. S. Nabi

Barrister-at-Law

C.C. to :

The Registrar

Queens University

Abedin Tower,

35, Kemal Ataturk Avenue (5th Floor), Dhaka-1213.

5. Notice Demanding Justice

NOTICE DEMANDING JUSTICE

1. The Chairman

National Board of Revenue

Segunbagicha

Kakrail, Dhaka

2. Secretary

Ministry of Finance (Internal Resources Division)

Sachibalay

Segunbagicha, Dhaka

3. Mr. Pezush Kanti Nath Deputy Commissioner

Customs, Excise and VAT

Tejgaon Area

House No. 17(6) Road No. 22

Banani, Dhaka-1213

4. The Chairman Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation

HBFC Building

1/D Agrabad Commercial Area

Chittagong.

5. Secretary Ministry of Energy & Mineral Resources

Sachibalay

Segunbagicha

Dhaka 1000

July 1, 2001

Dear Sirs Re: NOTICE DEMANDING JUSTICE ARISING OUT OF IMPOSITION OF FINE AND CONFISCATION OF

IMPORTED COSIGNMENT OF LUBE OIL PURSUANT TO SECTION-37 OF THE VALUE ADDED TAX (ACT

22 OF 1991).

Mr. Munirul Islam, Managing Director, Gulf Oil Bangladesh Ltd. having its registered

office situated at ‘RANGS BHABAN’ 113-116 Oil Airport Road, Tejgaon Industrial Area,

Dhaka, is our client who has forwarded to us all the necessary papers, documents,

notices, files etc. relating to imposition of higher rate of VAT have approached us with

instructions to address you as under:

1. That our company is Bangladesh counter part of a famous international oil company namely

Gulf Oil International originated from U.S.A. and having its registered office at ‘RANGS

BHABAN’ 113-116 Old Airport Road, Tejgaon Industrial Area, Dhaka.

2. That our client since 1998, are engaged in supplying and marketing Gulf branded of Lube Oil

throughout Bangladesh. And for this purpose, the petitioner company signed an Agreement

with Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation (BPC) on such terms and conditions as stated in the

said agreement.

3. That our client have to import Lube Oil from U.S.A. and for this business their entire

importation of Lube is regulated by Act passed by the Parliament namely Bangladesh

Petroleum Act, 1974 and by virtue of Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation Ordinance, 1976.

In terms of the said agreement our client is required to pay all customs duties, VAT, excise

duties as clearly mentioned in the said agreement i.e. 15% VAT to be paid to the customs

authority at the time of presentation of Bill of Lading.

4. That this mode of payment of taxes, is indisputable and have not been questioned nor as

such could be questioned having regard to the above Bangladesh Petroleum Act, 1974 read-

with the agreement entered with Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation (BPC) in this behalf

dated April 5, 2000.

5. That the L/C for importing the Lube Oil was paid for in the light of the foreign exchange

allotted to the petitioner under the Import & Export Act, 1950 and by virtue of Bangladesh

Bank Order No.129 of 1972.

6. That much after the importation of the Lube Oil, the said show cause notice of 08.04.2001

was issued upon our client and which was immediately responded to by our client denying

the allegation of facts made by you, stating inter-alia, that the contention of the customs

authority is both contrary to the Customs Act, 1969 and all other laws and Rules applicable

in this context as mentioned herein above.

7. That our client also contended that the impugned order of imposing fine and confiscation of

consignment dated 14.03.2001 is contrary to relevant provisions of the Constitution in as

much as similar other companies in the same nature of business, are not paying any extra

VAT imposed by virtue of S.R.O. No. Sadharan Adesh No.14/MUSAK.2000 dated 30.11.2000

nor for that matter they are saddled with such excess duties. Therefore, the impugned order

dated 30.05.2001 is discriminatory, malafide and have been passed for co-lateral purpose of

picking, choosing and finally victimising our client for reasons that could hardly be

concealed.

That in the premises aforesaid, we have instructions to call upon you as we hereby do,

to immediately withdraw/ cancel/ rescind the impugned penalty and confiscation dated

30.05.2001, failing which our client reserve the right to move the Hon’ble Supreme

Court by filing a Writ Petition, with prayer for suitable interim relief, cost and

consequences for which you will be held responsible.

A copy of this notice is kept in our office for further reference.

With thanks.

Yours sincerely

(Kazi Rehan Nabi)

Barrister-at-Law.

6. Reply to Legal Notice

Mr. Abdul Wahab

Advocate

Wahab & Associates

Rahmania International Complex

28/1/C, Toyenbee Circular Road

(4th Floor) Room No. 15

Motijheel C/A, Dhaka-1000.

18 April 2005

Dear Sir,

Sub: Your Legal Notice dated 12.04.2005 for and on behalf of your client M/S.

National Bank of Pakistan, 74, Motijheel C/A, Dhaka, concerning

adjustment of our clients alleged outstanding loan with interest shown

to be at Tk. 1,85,69,294.98 (the said outstanding amount is disputed)

against over draft (OD).

Dr. Md. Gias Uddin Mia, Son of Late Al-Haj Kasimuddin Ahmed, Managing

Director of British Bangladesh Trading Corporation Ltd. A joint venture corporation,

having its office premises situated at House No. 15, Road No. 5, Baridhara, P.S. Gulshan,

Dhaka-1212 is our Client, who have forwarded to us all the relevant documents, papers,

a copy of the L/C, a copy of your legal notice under reference dated 12.04.2005 etc. and

have approached us with instructions to reply to your said notice in the following terms.

That the relevant facts giving rise to our present dispute in creating

aforementioned overdraft facilities for importation of all machineries etc. for

installation of two CNG plants one at Mirpur and another Jatrapara at Manda, on or

before 2003, as mentioned in all related documents including Proforma Invoice, to

delayed and defective importation of the said C.N.G machines are all on record and as

such need not be repeated for saving your client’s precious time.

That your client, while opening the letter of credit was fully aware of the terms

and condition of the importation of the said machineries, which were manufactured in

Italy. Hence, you impliedly agreed to be parties to those terms and conditions of the

said contract with the Italian Machinery Co. namely PAGET Investment Co. Ltd.

That our client duly provided you with all cash security amounting to Tk. 50 lacs

(taka fifty lacs) only in Bangladeshi currency and mortgaged his Six Storied Building at

Uttara Model Town, on the basis of 99 years lease from the RAJUK, which however,

could not sold for your alleged breach; upon which you allowed the opening of the said

Letter of Credit on deferred payment of one year as such sale is prohibited under clause

nos. 17, 18, 22 etc. of the said Deed of Lease.

That our client had all the good and sincere intention to repay all your lawful

dues, incase of any intentional breach of contract/ commitment. In the instant case, as

stated above, certain technical breaches as alleged by you could have been committed

and that too for reasons beyond the control and contemplation of our client namely in

long delay of more than one year supply essential machineries/ component parts/ spare

parts/ gear box etc. In fact, as you are well aware that they even failed to supply the

gear box for the 1st CNG plant till day. The machinery was further delayed in necessary

installation, which is again, as stated above, is beyond the contract of our client. As an

esteemed foreign bank, in the name and style of National Bank of Pakistan you ought to

have taken it into consideration the genuine grievances of our client which compelled

her not to live up to his commitment. Almost a year have lapsed/ delayed in installation

of the said C.N.G plants or else our client would have liquidated all their outstanding

dues on time.

That our client do hereby intend to submit a revised schedule to pay the said

outstanding sums subject to our clients direct negotiations with you for proper and

effective settlement for the interest of both parties concerned. In this connection, our

client who is a very respectable medical practitioner/ G.P in England for the last 37

years. He personally went to your head office at 79, Motijheel C/A for direct

negotiations between 12-15 April 05, but unfortunately you even failed to give him

interview for 5 mins. This must have been due to no fault of yours.

Be that as it may, our client is constrained to point out that section 12 of the

Artha Rin Adalat Ain 1990 as amended, up to date i.e. the Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003

have no manner of application in the instant case to exercise power under the said

section 12 does not contain and or empowered National Bank of Pakistan which is out

and out a foreign Bank prohibitions from selling the mortgaged property without any

intervention of Artha Rin Adalat. The mortgaged property, including that of the

property belonging to our client cannot be sold notwithstanding violation of any terms

and conditions of the Letters of Credit as alleged by your client.

This power to sell, if any, is given to those banks which are specifically mentioned

in the said Artha Rin Adalat Act, 1990 as amended in 2003. In any case, the question of

selling the mortgage property at Uttara does not arise at all because such sell, as

threatened by you is completely beyond the terms and conditions of the 99 years lease

upon which the demised premises was leased out to our client.

Therefore, as your client ought to have been well aware, the interest of our client

is not ownership of the demised premises i.e. House No. 19, Road No. 3, Section -3

Uttara Model Town, Dhaka but is leasehold right and not right of ownership which is still

being held by RAJUK. In other words, you can not sell the property belonging to RAJUK

for realization of your so called loan liability. In any case, the value of the Two CNG

plants, as mentioned above, would far outweigh your lawful legal claim. However, our

client seriously disputes your client’s claim is too excessive at Tk. 1,85,69,294.98/- (taka

one crore eighty five lac sixty nine thousand two hundred ninety four and ninety eight

paisa) only.

That British Bangladesh Trading Corporation Ltd. is a joint venture Corporation

and it has been incorporated as such by complying with all the terms and condition

statutory provisions namely Bangladesh Overseas Investment Regulations Act and the

property of such Joint Venture Company could not be sold without compliance of the

provisions of the said Act and or taking prior permission from the Prime Minister

Secretariat, Shere-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka. Besides, and in so far our client is aware,

direct sale even at the instance of National Bank of Pakistan sold without the

intervention of the Court is misconceived.

That having regard to the above facts and circumstances, including the legal

positions to sell the property in auctions, as threatened by you, we hereby request your

client National Bank of Pakistan to come amicable/ reasonable settlement as mentioned

above. It should be mentioned in this connection that even in case of our Banks/

Nationalized Bank/ Private Banks direct sell without the intervention of the Court and

section 12 was challenged before the High Court Division of the Supreme Court and

their Lordships were pleased to issue Rule Nisi upon the Respondent Banks and stayed

the direct sell of all the mortgaged properties as advertised in the various daily news

paper. Should you still wish to proceed, in spite of our legal objections, you may do to so

at our own risk and responsibility, the costs and consequence for which, you shall be

held responsible.

With thanks,

Yours Sincerely,

K. S. Nabi

Barrister-at-Law

C.C. to:

1. General Manager, National Bank of Pakistan, 79, Motijheel C/A, Dhaka-1000.

2. Dr. Md. Gias Uddin Mia, House#15, Road#5, Baridhara, Gulshan, Dhaka-1212

3. Chairman, Bangladesh Overseas.

7. Reply to Legal Notice

cÖvwß ¯^xKvi iwk` mn †iwRt WvK‡hv‡M †cÖwiZ

wjM¨vj †bvwUk

cÖwZt Gg. Gg. Gm. Rvgvb, GW‡fv‡KU

†mvgvwR G‡mvwm‡qUm

(wjM¨vj KbmvjU¨v›Um GÛ cÖvKwUmbvim)

30 †KvU© nvDm óªxU

XvKv-1100

evsjv‡`k|

ZvwiLt 01.09.2004

Rbve,

MÖ“c 4 wmwKDwiwUm evsjv‡`k (cÖvt) wjt evwo bs-†K-1, †mvnivIqv`x© GwfwbD, evwiaviv, XvKv-1212, Avgvi †gvqv‡°j|

Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx KZ…©K Avw`ó nBqv Avcbvi ‡bvwU‡ki wjwLZ cvëv Reve cÖ`vb Kwi‡ZwQ †h,

Gw·‡W›U KL‡bv GKv GKR‡bi †`v‡l nq bv| Kvib GKRb fyj Ki‡jI Av‡iKRb mRvM _vK‡j yN©Ubv NU‡Z cv‡i bv,

ZvQvov yN©Ubv yN©UbvB| GUv Kv‡iv B”QvK…Z bq| Avcbvi †Kv¤úvbxi WªvBfvi BDmyd KZ…©K _vbvq †h Wv‡qix Kiv n‡q‡Q Zvi †_‡K

¯úó †h, GUv GKUv wbQK NUbv I GKUv Mvwoi mv‡_ Av‡iKUv Mvwoi av°v jvMvi e¨vcvi gvÎ| gvivZ¥K †Kvb NUbv NU‡j Mvox‡Zv

`~‡ii K_v Mvoxi PvjKI Av‡ivnx g„Zz¨i nvZ nB‡Z i¶v †cZ bv| wRwW Gw›Uª‡Z †h AwZiwÄZ K_v †jLv n‡q‡Q Zvi cÖgvb 40

wK‡jvwgUvi MwZ wewai K_v wjL‡Z wM‡q Ifvi ivBwUs K‡i IUv‡K 50 wK‡jvwgUvi Kiv n‡q‡Q| hv nDK ¸jkvb _vbvq Rgv †`Iqv

Av‡cvl wggvsmvi Wv‡qix‡Z †jLv n‡q‡Q ÒAv‡cvl wggvsmvi nBqv †Mjvg| †Kvb c¶B GB e¨vcv‡i _vbvq †Kvb gvgjv ev †Kvb Awf‡hvM

Dc¯’cbv Kwie bv|Ó Kv‡RB †hLv‡b Av‡cvl n‡q †M‡Q †mLv‡b Avi †Kvb ¶wZ c~iY †`Iqvi I Mvox ¶wZMÖ¯’ n‡q _vK‡j Wvk K‡i

†`Iqvi Avi my‡hvM _v‡K bv| Av‡cvl wggvsmvi Wv‡qix‡Z †Kv_vI ¶wZ c~i‡bi K_v wjLv bvB|

Avcbvi †bvwU‡k ewY©Z yB Kjv‡g Zvr¶wbKfv‡e wjwLZ Av‡cvl wggvsmvi †Kvb kZ©vejxi D‡j­L wQj bv ev bvB| Z‡e

16/06/2004 Zvwi‡L Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx KZ…©K Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx‡K wjLv 13/06/2004 Zvwi‡Li wPwV‡Z `yN©Ubvq

¶wZ †hUzKz n‡q‡Q Zv wVK Ki‡Z †h LiP jvM‡e Zv enb Kivi K_v ejv n‡h‡Q| wKš‘ †mLv‡b Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi wbæiƒcfv‡e

`vq-`vwqZ¡ m¤^‡Ü e‡j‡Q|

(i) By aggrieving Group 4 Securities Bangladesh (P) Ltd. does not by means admit any guilt

towards accident.

(ii) Vehicle owner or its representative shall not repair the vehicle until insurance survey or

completing its survey and investigation.

(iii) Repair and expense beyond Insurance limit will be covered by Group 4.

Avcbvi †bvwU‡ki Z…Zxq Kjv‡g ewY©Z e¨vcv‡i ®úUZt ejv n‡q‡Q †m GL‡bv KZ…©K Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j Insurance

Company †_‡K Surveyor Report cvIqv hvqwb| Surveyor Report bv †c‡j cÖK…Z ¶wZi cwigvb cvIqv m¤¢e bq Ges

Insurance Gi Limit Gi ewnf~©Z LiPvi I cwigvb Rvbv m¤¢e bq| GgZve ’vq Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi †Kvb B”Qv Awb”Qvi

e¨vcvi bq| 23/06/2004 Zvwi‡L Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx wb‡R‡`i B”Qv g‡Zv †gmvm© bvfvbv U‡qvUv †m›Uvi, i¨vsm IqvK©mc

wjwg‡UW I c¨vwmwdK gUim wjwg‡UW ‡_‡K †ekx cvU©m I Gi †ekx `vg †`wL‡q A¯vfvweK I Awek¦vm¨ ai‡bi †Kv‡Ukb msMÖn K‡i

cvwV‡q‡Qb I Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi 13/6/2004 G wjwLZ wPwVi 6 bs Kjv‡gi cwicwš’ KvRwU K‡i‡Qb| D³ wPwVi 6 bs Kjv‡g

ewY©Z Av‡Q †h, “No party shall make loss or profit from the claim,” Dci ‘ Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Zv‡`i 2iv AvMó

2004 mv‡ji wPwV gvidZ Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx‡K Authorization Letter w`‡Z Aby‡iva K‡i‡Q wKš‘ A`¨vewa Avcbvi

†Kv¤úvbx †mB Authorization Letter cvVvqwb| eis Insurance Company Gi Surveyor Gi Report cvIqvi Av‡MB

Insurance Gi limit Gi evwnf~©Z KZ UvKv LiP co‡e Zv Rvbvi Av‡MB wZbUv †Kv‡Ukb †RvMvi K‡i cvwV‡q‡Qb hv Awek¦vm¨,

AKíbxq I wg_¨v I ev‡bvqvUI e‡U| Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Insurance Company ‡_‡K Surveyor Report cvIqvi c‡i

¶wZi Ae ’v Rvbvi c‡iI Insurance Limit KZUv Cover Kiv‡bv I KZ UvKv Limit ewnf~©Z LiP n‡q‡Q Gme Rvbvi c‡i Avgvi

†gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi wek¦¯—I eûw`‡bi cwiwPZ IqvK©kc †_‡K MvwowU mviv‡q w`‡Z mvgvb¨ f ªZvi

LvwZ‡iI cÖ ‘Z wQj ev Av‡Q|

Kv‡RB Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi 13/06/2004 Zvwi‡L wjwLZ wPwVi 4bs Kjv‡g Av‡Q- Vehicle owner or its

representative to provide full co-operation to the insurance and its representative Ges 5 bs Kjv‡g Av‡Q-

Vehicle owner or its representative shall not repair the vehicle until insurance surveyor complete its

survey or cover investigation Gi cÖwZ Avcbvi „wó AvKl©b KiwQ Ges ¯úóZtB Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx mg¯— kZ© †f‡½

wb‡Ri g‡Zv K‡i Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx‡K loh‡š¿i g‡a¨ †d‡j Avw_©K myweav AR©‡bi cvqPvov Ki‡Q| 2iv AvM‡ói wPwVi gva¨‡g

Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Ggb †Kvb AcÖvmw½K K_v Zz‡jwb I gxgvsmvi cwic ’x wKQy K‡iwb| ïay cÖm½Z Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j

†Kv¤úvbxi wbKU Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi eû w`‡bi cÖvc¨ UvKv †P‡q‡Qb hv bv n‡j Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi c‡¶ MvoxwU

mvov‡bv Am¤¢e n‡q c‡o‡Q| Kvib UvKvq P‡j XvKv| UvKvi Lye cÖ‡qvRb e‡jB Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Aí K_vq Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j

†Kv¤úvbx‡K Zvi cvIbv UvKvi K_v ¯§iY Kwi‡q w`‡q‡Q| Ab¨ wKQy bq| Mvwo wVKv Ki‡Z †Zv UvKv jvM‡e| Avgvi †gvqv‡°j ‡Kv¤úvbx

†Zv Avi Avw_©K cÖwZôvb bq| Kv‡RB Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi wei“‡× AvbxZ Avcbvi Awf‡hvM mgyn †gv‡UB mwVK I hyw³ m¤úbœ

bq|

Avcbvi †bvwU‡k 4bs Kjv‡g AvbxZ weMZ 13/06/2004 Bs ZvwiL nB‡Z †givgZ ch©š— ¶wZ c~ib `vex ‡gv‡UB h_vh_ I

hyw³ m¤úbœ bq eis AwZ A‡í Avw_©K jvfevb nevi GKUv †KŠkj gvÎ| †givg‡Zi R‡b¨ Dc‡iv³ 3bs Kjv‡g †h Ae¯’vi cwi‡cÖw¶‡Z

Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi wKQy Kivi †bB|

Avcbvi †bvwU‡ki 5bs Kjv‡g ewY©Z Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi cÖwZ Avbcvi ¶wZ c~i‡bi †h `vex I ûgwK Zv wbQK

A‡hŠw³K I A‡kvfbxq| Dc‡iv³ 3bs Kjv‡g ewb©Z Ae¯’vi cwi‡cÖw¶‡Z Avgvi †gqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx Kvj‡¶c‡bi R‡b¨ †Kvb µ‡gB

`vqx n‡Z cv‡i bv| GUv Insurance Company Gi GKUv Process Gi e¨vcv‡i Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxB ïay cv‡i Zv‡`i KvQ

†_‡K Survey Report msMÖn Ki‡Z I Zvi †cÖw¶‡Z Ges Avgvi †Kv¤úvbxi eive‡i Authorization Letter w`‡q Avgvi †gvqv‡°j

†Kv¤úvbx‡K Zvi wek¦¯— IqvK©mc †_‡K MvwowU †givgZ K‡i w`‡Z| wKš‘ Zv bv K‡i Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbx AwZ mn‡R cÖZvibvi

gva¨‡g Avw_©Kfv‡e jvfevb nevi R‡b¨ Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi wei“‡× bvbv iKg ARynvZ m„wó Kivi cÖvqvm cv‡”Q|

Avgvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi R‡b¨ e‡j n‡”Q Avcbvi †gvqv‡°j †Kv¤úvbxi †Kvb Pvc Gi gy‡L Avgvi †gvqv‡°j bZ ¯xKvi

Ki‡e bv|

GB †bvwU‡ki Kwc wbæ ¯v¶iKvixi †m‡i¯—vq msiw¶Z iBj|

ab¨ev`v‡š—

8. Notice claiming compensation and termination from office

Legal Notice

(With Registered A/D)

Ref: 001/10/2010

Dated: 31/10/2010

To

Md. T Rahman

House No.9A, Jafarabad

Dhanmondi, Dhaka.

----------------Notice Receiver

From

S B Joardar

Advocate, Dhaka Judge Court

Chamber:

Ain-qanoon.com

2A, Road-19,Sector-15, Utara, Dhaka

Dhaka-1230

----------------Notice Giver

For and on behalf of

S B Security Printing & Papers Ltd.

NSC Tower, Purana Paltan, Dhaka-1000.

Under the instruction from my aforesaid client, I do hereby give you this notice, which is as under:

6. That my client S B Security Printing and Papers Ltd. is a reliable and established company in Bangladesh which is carrying on the business of security paper printing with good will and reputation.

7. That my above mentioned client appointed you as IT officer, a very important possession, with effect from dated 01/10/2005.

8. You are absent from 31/07/2010 without giving any prior notice and did not handover your duties and responsibilities to the concerned person at office that is totally breach of the employment agreement and against this company law and rules.

9. That my client sent you official notice dated on 08/08/2010 to handover all the matters that you were responsible and liable for.

10. That my client did not get any response from you after sending the notice and the company is facing loss because of your negligence, default and breach of employment agreement.

11. That this time if you do not response or come to the office then you will be liable for all the loss or damage that is occurring because of you. You shall also be liable to be terminated from the office and your services as well.

I, therefore, through this legal notice, considering the above facts and

circumstances, call upon you to come to the office and meet my client

within 7 (seven) days from the receipt of this legal notice, in the event

you fail to do so, I have clear instruction from my client to take

necessary legal action against you. In this event, you shall be liable for

all costs and consequences.

A copy of this legal notice is kept in my chamber for further record and further use.

Yours sincerely

________________________

Advocate S B Joardar

9. Notice claiming compensation

Mr. Anis Karim

Managing Director

T T Ltd.

Jahangir Tower (5th Floor)

20 Kazi Nazrul Islam Road

Karwan Bazar Commercial Area

Dhaka-1215

November 1, 2000

Dear Sir

Re: Our letter dated June 22, 2000 for failure to pay for your admitted liability and the

negotiated amount of US$ 25,000/- as against our client’s present claim for US$

35,000/- only arising out of Bill of Lading No. TTL 010081 consignment shipped on

12.08.99 consignee is being Palmon Europe BV.

With reference to the above and as per our letter dated June 22, 2000, please take notice that

we have received instructions from our client Mr. Jahirul Islam, Managing Director, Legend 5

Attires of 19 S.M. Saleh Road, Tanbazar, Narayanganj-1400 to file a suit under Section 241 &

242 of the Companies Act-1994 for winding up of your company Total Transportation for failure

to pay the negotiated amount of US$ 25,000/-. Despite providing you more than 4 months and

all the negotiation we had in this connection, unfortunately you have miserably failed to settle

the amount admittedly due to you.

Now therefore, we have been instructed by our client to request you, as we hereby do, to settle the

total amount of US$ 35,000/- within 3 days of receipt of this letter failing which our client would be

constrained to file a proceedings under Section-241 & 242 of the Companies Act-1994 for winding up of

your company. A copy of this letter has been kept in our office for further reference, if any.

Yours sincerely,

(Ahasanuzzaman)

Advocate

10. Notice claiming rights

GOBINDA CHANDRA TAGORE Advocate

Bangladesh Supreme Court

Registered With A/D

Date: 30.06.2002

To

1. The Secretary

Ministry of Education

2. The Senior Assistant Secretary

Section-4,

Ministry of Education,

Both are Bangladesh Secretariat,

Ramna, Dhaka-1000.

3. The Director General

Directorate of Secondary & Higher Education

Shiksha Bhaban,

Ramna, Dhaka-1000.

4. The Chairman

Board of Intermediate and Secondary & Higher Education

Bakshibazar, Dhaka.

5. The Upazilla Nirbahi Officer

Kirimganj, Kishorganj

6. The Chairman

7. Mr. Makhan Chandra Biswar

Acting Headmaster

Both are of Guzadia Abdul Hakim Secondary School

Post Office – Guzadia

Police Station – Karimganj

Disctict – Kishoreganj.

Legal Notice

Dear Sir,

Under the instruction of my client, Mr. Md. Emdad Uddin Son of Late Nasir Uddin

Ahmed, Headmaster, Guzadia Abdul Hakim Secondary School, Post Office Guzadia, P. S.

Karimgonj, District Kishoregonj I address you as follows:

1. That you are well informed that in pursuance of the orders issued vide Memo No.

Sha: 4/5B-9/2001/381-Shiksha dated 25.10.2001 and Memo No. Sha: 4/5B-

9/2001/430-Shiksha dated 12.12.2001 by the Ministry of Education you, notice

receiver No. 2 by the order issued vide Memo No. Sha: 4/5B-9/2001/43.1-Shiksha

dated 12.12.2001 informed the notice receiver No. 3 that the Govt. has decided to

withhold the Govt. Contribution towards the salary of my client; notice- receiver No.

3 by the order issued vide memo dated 14.10.2002 withheld the said Govt.

Contribution towards my client’s salary and you, notice-receiver Nos-5 and / or 6 by

the order issued vide Memo No. UNO/Karim/Shiksha-218 dated 13.02.2002

suspended my client from his service sine die.

2. That challenging the said orders issued vide the Memo dated 25.10.2001 and

12.12.2001, my client filed and moved Writ Petition No. 1603 of 2002 before the

High Court Division of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and a Division Bench of High Court

Division by the order dated 08.04.2002 issued a Rule Nisi as prayed for on you,

notice receiver Nos. 1-6 and also stayed operation of all the subsequent decisions

and directions made and the proceedings taken in pursuance of the impugned order

for a period of 3(three) months initially and thereby operations of the said orders

dated 12.12.2002 and 14.01.2002

with holding the Govt. Contribution towards my clients salary and the order dated

13.02.2002 suspending my client from his service sine die have also been stayed.

3. That the said Rule Nisi and the order of stay were served on you, Notice receiver No.

1-4 on 10.04.2002 through the notice server of the Hon’ble High Court Division and

my client also served the certificate copy of the said Rule Nisi and the order of stay

with a forwarding letter dated 13.04.2002 on you, notice-receiver Nos. 1,2 and 4 by

registered post with acknowledgement and the notice-receiver No. 3,5 and 6-7

received the same on 13.04.2002, 15.04.2002 and 29.04.20023 respectively.

4. That after service of the said Rule Nisi and the order of stay inspite of my client’s request made in the said forwarding letter dated 13.04.2002 for taking necessary steps in compliance with the said Rule Nisi and order of stay none of you took any step nor you allowed my client to perform his official functions nor you gave him any salary including the Government contribution towards his salary and thus you have yet not honoured, obeyed and complied with the said order of the Hon’ble High Court Division.

5. That you, notice-receiver No. 7 being the chief Executive as the Acting Headmaster and Acting Member Secretary of the said school the said Rule Nisi and order of stay were communicated to the Chairman of the said school through you and thereby you have also gathered information and knowledge of the same and my client has also informed you and thus you are knowing fully well and deliberately not honouring and obeying the said order of stay, rather you are abetting the other notice-receivers in defying and disobeying the said order of the Hon’ble High Court Division.

6. That the said order of stay passed by the Hon’ble High Court Division is binding upon

you and you are the only concerned authority to implement and comply with the

said order of stay sand there is also every scope opened for this purpose.

7. That you have a legal commitment and obligation that your conduct must always

manifestly be responsible to the detects of the Court which you cannot and must not

trifle on any account whatsoever and this is to remind you that you are saddled with

a legal duty that orders of the court that concern you are to be obeyed by strict

compliance and by no circumvention. The instant case is one which call for your

unreserved attention for the reasons as stated above.

8. That it is for your information that deliberates disobedience to or non-compliance

with any order of any court of law is contempt of the concerned court, which is a

punishable offence.

Therefore, you are hereby further requested to allow my client to perform his official

functions and to pay him salary including the Govt. Contribution towards his salary in

complying with the said order of stay immediately and you are also requested to

communicate me your decision in this regard on or before 10.07.2002 positively, in default

my client shall be constrained to file and move a contempt petition against you before the

Hon’ble High Court Division.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully

(Gobinda Chandra Tagore)

11. Notice for eviction of Tenant or cancellation of tenancy agreement

Mr. S Abdullah

Shop No-30 (1st Floor)

10 Bangabandhu Avenue

Dhaka-1000

August 22, 2001

Dear Sir

Re: Legal Notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property (Act IV of

1882).

Mr. Deen Mohammad s/o late Al-Haj Noor Mohammed of 23 Shamoly, Street No.2, P.S.

Mohammadpur, Dhaka-1209 is our client who has forwarded to us a copy of the Lease

Agreement dated January 01, 1993 in respect of Shop No.20 (1st Floor), 20

Bangabandhu Avenue, Dhaka-1000 and all other related papers, documents etc. and

has approached us with instructions to address you as under:

Since the Deed of Agreement in respect of the demised premises as signed on January

01, 1993, you have committed the following breaches of the contract.

You have violated Clause 2 of the said Lease Agreement by not paying regularly the

monthly rent within the stipulated time as mentioned in the lease agreement. It may be

recalled that you have been committing breaches of clause 2 and hence, you are

defaulters, irrespective of the fact that by Judgment and Order dated 26.07.2001 passed

by the learned Assistant Judge, Mr. Syed Kamal Hossain, 4th Assistant Judge Court,

Dhaka in House Rent Case No.40 of 2000, you appear to have made few belated

payments of rents into the said Court.

That in the premises aforesaid, we have instructions to call upon you, as we hereby do,

to immediately vacate the said premises by end of September 2001 in default whereof

you will be treated as trespasser of the said premises and our client would be

constrained to file necessary suit in the appropriate court for eviction along with all

other legal remedies

A copy of this notice is kept in our office for future reference, if any.

With thanks.

Yours sincerely

(Ahasanuzzaman)

Barrister-at-Law.

12. Notice claiming ownership/ possession/ lawful rights through power of attorney

LEGAL NOTICE

(Registered with AID)

October 24, 2002

To:

Mr. Shafique Ahmed

Son of Late Abed Ahmed Mollah

House# 8, Road# 13,

Dhanmandi R/A, Dhaka.

On Behalf of-.

Mr. Sadeque Ahmed

Son of Late Abed Ahmed Mollah

House# 8, Road# 13,

Dhanmandi R1A, Dhaka.

From:

Tuhin Malik

Advocate

Supreme Court of Bangladesh

Malik Law Associates

202 Shahid Syed Nazrul Islam Avenue (New)

12 Bijoy Nagar (Old)

Dhaka-1000.

Under the instruction of my client Sadeque Ahmed, Son of Late Abed Ahmed

Mollah of House # 8, Road # 13, Dhanmandi R/A, Dhaka, I hereby give you this

notice as follows:-.

1. That the aforesaid client executed a Deed of Power of Attorney on the

21' day of April 1998 and which was registered in the Sub Registered

Office, Mohammadpur being registered No. 1320/1998, appointing you

as his lawfully attorney and agent for him, in his name and on his behalf

to do, execute and perform all acts, deeds and things in the property

schedule below.

2. That for personal reasons and consideration and for deliberate misconduct

and commission of acts of malfeasance and breach of trust entrusted upon

you as attorney and for doing illegal act, or acts not entrusted and rendered

by you for the management of his property scheduled below and the

execution of said power of Attorney had gone against my client and my

client's interests and as such that my client cancelled the said power of

attorney on the 17`i' day of September 2002 and which was registered in

the Sub Registered Office, Mohammadpur being registered No. 4173/2002

and thus also absolutely and completely revoked all powers or authority

thereby given to you provided that nothing contained shall render valid

which has been done illegally against my client's interest of the said

Property scheduled below or effective any act, deed or thing unlawfully and

against the interest of the said properties under and by virtue of the said

power given to you before the revocation.

3. That the said power of attorney is hereby revoked, you have no authority whatever to do any

act, deed or thing of the said properties in any way on behalf of my said client.

4. In the aforesaid premises, I hereby give you this notice to the effect that

you are no more the attorney of my said client to the scheduled property

and you are directed to handover all the connected papers, documents and

accounts which are lying in your custody by 7 (seven) days on receipt of this

notice to me failing which my said client shall be constrained to take

appropriate legal action against you both in civil and criminal courts and in

which case you shall be liable to all compensation and cost thereof.

A copy of this notice is kept in my file for future course of action.

Shedule of property

District Dhaka P.S. Dhanmondi Plot No. 707(old) 8 (new), Road No. 30(old)

13(New).

Thanking you,

Tuhin Malik

Advocate

Supreme Court of Bangladesh.

13. Statutory Notice under section-169 of the Town Improvement Act

The Chairman, Dated the 23rd of March- 2003

Rajdhani Unnayan Kartipakkhya

(RAJUK)

D.I.T. Avenue, Motijheel

Dhaka .

Re : Statutory Notice under section 169 of the Town Improvement Act.

Dear Sir,

Mr. Kuddus Son of Late Alhaj Md. Ismail of 1, Elephant Road, Dhaka is our client who has

instructed us to address you as under:

1. Our client is a Co-owner of the Multi – Storied Ismail Mansion Super Market

Constructed upon S. A. Plot No.2288 of Mouza Dhanmondi, being Holding No. 1,

Elephant Road, Dhaka.

2. One Md. Sadrul Islam Started Construction of a Multi-Storied Building upon Holding

No.385 Elephant Road, Dhaka, adjacent East of the Ismail Mansion Super Market having

Common Boundary at the Eastern side of our Client’s market.

3. The said Mr. Sadrul Islam started the Construction of his Building without sparing the

statutory space of 4 Feet at the Western side or any other sides of his building site. On

the contrary, he demolished the boundary wall of our client’s market at the Eastern

side, which was built after sparing 4 Feet vacant space between our client’s market

building, and the boundary wall on the East and damaged the under-ground sewerage

line and other fittings of our client’s market that run through the said vacant space.

4. The said illegal Construction at the Holding No. 385, in violation of the Building

Construction Act and the fact of damaging our clients fittings were brought to the notice

of the RAJUK which held a Inquiry through its Officials and found the construction illegal,

whereupon, said Owner was given Show Cause notice and finally, he was directed to

break and demolish the unauthorised construction under Rajuk Memo No. Rajuk

/NOO/2C186/2000/619 dated 23-05-2000. The said Offender, nevertheless, carried on

the Construction and completed the Roof Casting of the Ground floor, but thereafter

kept the construction stopped for a quite long time.

5. The said Mr. Sadrul Islam has again recently taken up the Construction of the 1st floor in

complete disregard to regulations and specific direction of the RAJUK. Besides that, he

has hatched out a Plan to open up a passage by breaking a part of our clients boundary

wall in the East and thereby to create a direct link with our client’s market.

6. The aforesaid Construction upon Holdings No.385 is not only an act of trespass upon our

client’s property but also has the illegal connivance of the RAJUK as otherwise it would

not have been possible for Mr. Sadrul Islam to continue such illegal Construction.

7. Our client has, therefore, proposed a legal action against the said Mr. Sadrul Islam in

which relief against unauthorised Construction will he prayed for in respect of

declaration that RAJUK is liable to demolish the said unauthorised construction as the

cause of action thereof arose on the date of RAJUK’s letter dated 23-05-2000 as above

mentioned and RAJUK will be made a defendant for active and illegal support to such a

Construction which RAJUK itself had found illegal and directed the delinquent

constructor to demolish it and a copy of this notice will be produced before the Court.

We are, therefore, instructed to request you, as we hereby do, to take proper step to stop the said

illegal construction within 30 (thirty) days from receipt of this notice, failing which you will be

liable for legal consequences.

Yours faithfully

(Akash & Rifaz)

14. Notice on grievances of Club membership

To,

The President / Secretary,

Dhaka Club Ltd.

Ramna, Dhaka.

22 November 2003

Dear Sirs,

Re : Grievance Petition.

I was utterly shocked and surprised on receipt of your letter No. 6099/DC dated

11.10.2003 where under you conveyed the decision of the Executive Committee to withdraw

my so-called honorary membership of your esteemed Club.

It is noted with some concern that the conduct of the Executive committee since 1990

appears more or less conspiratorial as regards the membership of my father and subsequently

that of mine.

On 07.10.1990 as apparently innocent letter being No. 247/DC was sent to my father

Mr. N Ahmed (A/C No. A-133) offering him Honorary Life Membership ramifications whereof

my father did not comprehend then nor was he informed as regards the consequences thereof.

It is to be noted here that under the Articles of the Dhaka Club Ltd. there is no such term as

“Honorary Life Membership.”

Further note should be taken of the letter No. 33/DC dated 31.12.2002 sent by the then

Secretary of the Club whereby my father’s membership was cancelled from the “List of

Honorary Members.” This step however has no legal backing under Article Nos. 22 (d) (e) (f) (g)

(h) or Article 23. Even Article 23 refers to the cessation of membership of a special Member

and my father was not a special member but a Life member.

As regards to the letter No. 6099/DC dated 11.10.2003 note must be taken of Article

22(d) and a literal meaning thereof would be that the son, daughter etc, as the case may be,

shall be transferred the same type of Membership that of his / her parent etc. and in my case,

the membership of my father was “Permanent” type and I should have been given the

“Permanent membership” and I had been paying the fees and outgoings as are levied on a

permanent member. On the other hand, if Article 22(e) be used, the membership of my father

would have expired on the day of transfer and this did not happen.

Since, I fail to find any justification for withdrawing the memberships of my father and

that of myself, I am of the opinion that the acts of your Club had been highly prejudicial and

arbitrary as against myself and my father and, I, would request you to withdraw your letter No.

6099/DC dated 11.10.2003 immediately and to reconsider my permanent membership as

otherwise I, fear a great wrong would have been done to a family by your Club.

Thanking you in anticipation.

Yours faithfully

(N Z AHMED)

15. Notice under the Company Act 1994 (AGM)

Company Law Solutions provides an expert service for your company law requirements, including such

as the calling and the conduct of company meetings.

There are two types of general meetings: Annual General Meetings and Extraordinary General

Meetings. The directors of the company should determine the date of the AGM (if they wish to hold one)

and may call an EGM whenever they think fit. There are also provisions for members to request a

general meeting to be held and to call one themselves if their request is not complied with. The main

statutory provisions are:

Directors' power to call general meetings

Members' power to require directors to call general meetings

Members may call meeting at company's expense

The court may order meeting

Notice of general meetings

Contents of notice

Special notice

Accidental failure to give notice of resolution or meeting

Circulation of members' statements

Follow ain-qanoon.com’s user links of http://www.roc.gov.bd/ (RJS Companies and Firms) in the

context of Bangladesh for examples of notices and meetings of companies and firms.