Law: Companies Ordinance, 1984

Section: 305,305(f)(i)(ii)(iv)(v),309(b),309(c)

(a) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984) [since repealed]--- ----Ss. 305, 309(b) & 309(c)---Petition for winding up of company---Requirements with respect to petitions under Ss. 309(b) & 309(c) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984---Distinction---Subsections (b) and (c) of S. 309 of the Ordinance were distinct and separate from each other, and were neither co-dependent nor did they correspond to any particular part of S. 305 of the Ordinance---If S. 309(c) of the Ordinance was to be made a condition precedent for S. 309(b) that would tantamount to reading the requirements of the former into those of the latter which the Court could not permit. (b) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984) [since repealed]--- ----Ss. 305(f)(i), 305(f)(ii), 305(f)(iv), 305(f)(v) & 309(b)---Winding up of company on petition of Additional Registrar CRO [SECP]---Grounds---Carrying on business not authorized by memorandum, carrying on unlawful activities---As per the Memorandum of Association (MOA) of the petitioner-company its object was to carry on the business of, inter alia, risks assessments; analysis and management; business consultancy; project implementation consultancy, with an emphasis on market entry advisory; project implementation support and risk management consultancy, etc.---Additional Registrar CRO reported that the company was engaged in security related matters, such as provision of security services to foreigners, using trackers during movements, attempting to visit restricted areas, collecting information about armed forces, using fake number plates, which activities/business were not only ultra vires its MOA but also posed a security risk to the country---Additional Registrar sought sanction from the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) under S. 309(b) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 to present a petition before the competent jurisdiction (High Court) for winding up of the petitioner-company, which sanction was granted---Petition for winding up the petitioner-company was allowed by the High Court---Held, that petitioner-company was providing risk management and security-related services to foreign companies and foreign embassies and it had…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492