Geeteara's firms clarify tenancy row
Wednesday, 16 January 2008
Three firms owned by former adviser Geeteara Safiya Choudhury and her husband Nazim Kamran Choudhury claimed Monday to be the legal tenants of a Gulshan building after its owner had accused the couple of trespass and illegal occupation, reports bdnews24.com.
In a statement, the firms said a Dhaka court judge had asked Adcomm, Signage and Megavision, housed in the building, to continue paying house rents to the court.
The companies believe that the judgement is enough to remove the "rumours and speculation" about the tenancy of the building on Road No-41 at Gulshan.
In a raft of complaints, Farhana Islam, owner of the house, accused Geeteara and her husband of trespass, land-grab and intimidation.
Farhana alleged that the couple had kept occupying the building, even after a rental agreement expired.
The statement sent to the news agency Monday by Adcomm said: "It may be mentioned that in October last, the landlord of the premises refused to accept the monthly rent."
The statement further said the judge had ruled that the tenant petitioners such as Adcomm, Signage and Megavision were allowed to continue submitting rents to the court under the Premises Rent Control Act.
Referring to the judgement, the statement said the landlord failed to explain in court why the companies would be bound to vacate the "rented premises".
A copy of the judgement was filed with the Gulshan Police Station, according to the statement.
In a statement, the firms said a Dhaka court judge had asked Adcomm, Signage and Megavision, housed in the building, to continue paying house rents to the court.
The companies believe that the judgement is enough to remove the "rumours and speculation" about the tenancy of the building on Road No-41 at Gulshan.
In a raft of complaints, Farhana Islam, owner of the house, accused Geeteara and her husband of trespass, land-grab and intimidation.
Farhana alleged that the couple had kept occupying the building, even after a rental agreement expired.
The statement sent to the news agency Monday by Adcomm said: "It may be mentioned that in October last, the landlord of the premises refused to accept the monthly rent."
The statement further said the judge had ruled that the tenant petitioners such as Adcomm, Signage and Megavision were allowed to continue submitting rents to the court under the Premises Rent Control Act.
Referring to the judgement, the statement said the landlord failed to explain in court why the companies would be bound to vacate the "rented premises".
A copy of the judgement was filed with the Gulshan Police Station, according to the statement.