This document is a civil suit filed by Sajjad Bin A Hai against Jiaul Karim Murad. Sajjad loaned Jiaul Tk. 55,00,000 for business purposes on 10.12.2015, with the agreement that Jiaul would repay the money within 6 months. When Sajjad asked for repayment on 15.06.2016, Jiaul denied taking the money. On 03.10.2016, Jiaul told Sajjad's friend that he would not repay the debt and planned to dispose of his property and move to Kishoreganj. Sajjad is seeking a court order for Jiaul to furnish security, repay the debt plus compensation

1. In THE COURT OF 5th
JOINT DISTRICT JUDGE, GAZIPUR.
Civil Suit No. 420/2016.
IN THE MATTER OF
suit for recovery of money Tk.55, 00,000/- An
interim Application under Order XXXVIII Rule
5 and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
IN THE MATTER OF
Sajjad Bin A Hai
S/O Abdul Hai,
Village: Rajendrapur
Post Office: Rajendrapur,
Police Station: Shreepur,
Thana: Shreepur
District: Gazipur.
…………..Plaintiff
Versus.
Jiaul Karim Murad
S/O of ……………..
Village: Rajendrapur
Post Office: Rajendrapur,
Police Station: Shreepur,
Thana: Shreepur
District: Gazipur.
…………Defendant

2. The humble petition of the above named plaintiff most respectfully states as follows:
1. That Mr. Sajjad Bin A Hai plaintif of this case is an honest, pious, passionate person. He gave
Tk.55, 00,000/- to the Jiaul Karim Murad for the pupose of business 10.12.2015.
2. That the defendant promises him to return money within 6 month.
3. That the plaintiff when invoke the lend money the defendant evasively deny on 15.06.2016 no
money he takes from plaintiff.
4. That the plaintiff invokes the mechanism under the law of the land.
5. That on 03 October, 2016 the defendant meet with one of plaintiffs friend Nashidul Haque and
told that he won’t return that money rather he is going to dispose all of his property and shifted
to kishoreganj .
6. That the plaintiff try to solve this matter by way of salish defendant avoid that by showing
some unusual matter. Neither plaintiff defendant did same to other people also.
Relief Claimed:
(11) The plaintiff, therefore prays that
1. The court is pleased to order the Defendant to furnish security before the court.
2. The plaintiff invoke the lend money from defendant as well as possible.
3. The defendant is ordered to pay compensation for mental harassment, loss of wages, and
cost of this litigation.
4. The plaintiff invoke the mechanism as like that until end of the suit the defendant is
ordered not to go anywhere beyond local jurisdiction of the court.
Whereof, it is most humbly prayed that your
Honor would graciously be pleased to
a) Pass an order of permanent
injunction restraining the
defendants from sell.
b) direction for attaching the
immoveable properties of the
defendants and sell thereof in case
of failure to repay the decree
amount by the defendants to the
plaintiff;
And for this act of kindness, the plaintiff as in duty bound shall ever pray.

3. Place: ………………….
(Signature of the plaintiff)
Date: …………………..
Advocate
Verification
I, ______, do hereby solomnly verify that the contents from paras 1 to 4 are correct and true to
the best of my knowledge and contents from para 5 to 6 are based on legal advice, which I
believe to be correct. Affirmed at Indore this 14th Day of September 2016.
(Signature)
Plaintiff

4. Affidavit
I, …………………………………………………. Son of ………………………………..
Bangladeshi by birth do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows:
1. That, I am fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this suit and as the tadbirkar of
the suit I am competent and authorize to swear this affidavit;
2. That the statements made herein above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and in
testimony whereof I set my hand this….. Day of August, 2016 before the Commissioner of
Affidavit of this Court at about …..Am/ pm;
DEPONENT
……………… Prepared in my office The deponent is known to me and identified by me.

5. AIR 1982 SC 989
It was held that attachment before judgment is levied where the
court on an application of the plaintiff is satisfied that the
defendant with intend to obstruct or delay the execution of any
decree that may be passed against him (a) is about to dispose of
the whole or any part his property,(b) is about to remove the
whole or any part of his property from the local limits of the
jurisdiction of the court
AIR 1984 Mad 70
It was held that before an order of attachment the court must be
satisfied about the following tow conditions: if the defendant
with the intention (a) that the defendant dispose of the whole or
any part his property (b) that the dismissal is with the intention
of obstructing or delaying the execution of any decree that may
be passed against him.