Skip to main content

High Court Ruling - Civil Detention of a guarantor

Case Name: Md. Jahirul Hoque vs. Judge, Artha Rin Adalat, Chattogram & Others,   Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6846 of 2016, Citation: 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 20

Court: High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh

Judgment Date: 09 June 2022

Subject: Civil detention of a judgment-debtor/guarantor under Section 34(1), Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003.

In this case, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh addressed the issue of the detention of a guarantor under a court order in accordance with Section 34. The main conclusions of the court were as follows:

  1. A guarantor can be detained under Section 34 after a court decision is issued.

  2. Enforcement of the decision can be carried out simultaneously against both the borrower and the guarantor.

  3. The borrower's property has priority in its realization, but this does not require exhausting all funds before detaining the guarantor under Section 34.

  4. Detention under Section 34 is a civil/enforcement measure, not a criminal punishment.

  5. The debtor under a court order is not obliged to surrender to the authorities before appealing the detention order.

  6. To file an application under Section 34, confirmation in the form of an affidavit or proper verification in accordance with Rule 15 of Order VI of the Civil Procedure Code/Rule 19 of the Civil Rules is required. A simple signature is insufficient.

In this case, the detention was quashed due to defects in the bank's application under Section 34, and not because the guarantor cannot be detained.

Judgment- Detention of the loan guarantor by Manjurul Alam Arif

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Banking Recovery Laws in Bangladesh: Artha Rin Adalat Ain, Negotiable Instruments Act & Contract Act.

Banking Recovery Law Digest · ARAA 2003 · NI Act 1881 · Contract Act 1872 Banking Recovery Law Digest Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 · Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 · Contract Act, 1872 (Guarantee, ss. 126–147) Author: Manjurul Alam Arif · Practitioner reference — statutory maps, timelines, and traps. All statutory text below is drawn directly from the Acts; verify current amendment status before relying on any provision in a filing, and confirm any case citation independently before use in a document. Jump to Part A — ARAA 2003 | Part B — NI Act 1881 | Part C — Contract Act 1872 ...

A Landmark Judgment on Foreign Travel Restriction in Artha Rin Cases

  A Landmark Judgment on Foreign Travel Restriction in Artha Rin Cases  19 SCOB [2024] HCD 76: Ali Imam Vs. The Judge, Artha Rin Adalat & Ors. PDF Case Overview - Court: High Court Division (Special Original Jurisdiction). - Bench: Mr. Justice J.B.M. Hassan and Mr. Justice Razik-Al-Jalil. - Case Type: Writ Petition No. 2191 of 2022. - Judgment Date: August 4, 2022. - Key Statutes Involved: Sections 6(5), 34(1), and 57 of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003; Article 36 of the Constitution of Bangladesh; Section 7(c) of the Bangladesh Passport Order, 1973.   Core Facts of the Case - The Loan & Lawsuit: International Finance Investment & Commerce Bank Limited (IFIC) filed Artha Rin Suit No. 21 of 2012 against the petitioner (Ali Imam) and others to recover an outstanding loan of Tk. 61,03,31,623.97. - The Bank's Application: During the pending suit, the Bank filed an application under Section 57 of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 and Section 7(c) of the Bangladesh Pass...

Critical Artha Rin Case Explained: Essential for Credit officers , Practitioners & Law Students

  Artha Rin Adalat (Money Loan Court) cases form the backbone of financial recovery in Bangladesh, especially for banks and Non-Bank Financial Institutions (NBFIs) grappling with cheque dishonour and loan defaults . For legal practitioners and credit officers, navigating its procedural maze is a daily challenge. This analysis breaks down eight critical problems whether you're preparing for the Bar Council exam , drafting a credit recovery report , or providing opinion this structured guide is your practical toolkit. Why These Cases Are Essential: · Execution pitfalls under the ARAA, 2003 · Party addition and locus standi issues · Court fees and registration complications · Handling third-party claims in auctions 📋 Case At-a-Glance Problem- 1 A developer company proposed Mr. “Y” to develop his land which he got from RAJUK by virtue of a lease agreement for 99 years . He informed the developer company that the title deed of his land had been deposited with the Trust Bank as equita...