The Chittagong Port Authority Ordinance, 1976
Section 19(1)(a)(d), 24, 26, 27
The Admiralty Judge had no jurisdiction to remit the charges payable to the port Authority under the Chittagong port Authority Ordinance, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance) and allow the vessel to leave the territorial waters of Bangladesh without payment of the dues. Chairman, Chittagong port Authority vs Bangladesh (Bimalendu Bikash Roy Choudhury J)(Civil) 2ADC 351
Chittagong Port Authority Ordinance, 1976
Section 49- Notice In the plaint, there is an averment that notice under section 49 of the Chittagong Port Authority Ordinance had been served. When there is clear assertion in the plaint itself that notice under section 49 of the Ordinance was served upon the Chittagong Port Authority, it could not be said that the suit is barred by law as envisaged in clause (d) of rule 11 of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure.
We hold that the High Court Division was justified in allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment delivered by the learned Subordinate Judge rejecting the plaint. The appeal is dismissed and the impugned judgment passed by the High Court Division is affirmed. ...Abdur Razzak Dobhash =VS= Ali Murtaza Dobhash, [9 LM (AD) 79]
