Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 256 1986 SLD 256 1986 CLC 2933
Sindh High Court
Judicial Miscellaneous No. 16 of 1984, decision dated:17-07-1986. dates of hearing: 6-11-1985; 10th and 11-02-1986
NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, JUSTICE
Kamal Azfar and Umer Hayat Tiwana Advocate for Petitioner. J.H. Rahmitoola for
Respondents.

MESSRS JAMES FINLAY P. L. C.

VS

MESSRS HELLENIC LINES LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Law: Companies Act, (VII of 1913)

Section: 162

(a) Companies Act (VII of 1913)---Ss. 162 & 166--Foreign company--Winding up of--Requirements- Where a foreign company proceeded against for winding up, was in no position to meet its liabilities including liabilities to creditors in Pakistan, same held, was liable to be wound up as an unregistered company being insolvent and bankrupt. (b) Companies Act (VII of 1913)-- ---Ss. 270 to 276--Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), Ss. 443 to 449--Sections 270 to 276 of repealed Companies Act, 1913, correspond to Ss. 443 to 449 of Companies Ordinance, 1984. (c) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)-- ---Ss. 508(2), 510 & 444--Companies Act (VII of 1913), S.271--General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S. 6--Repeal of Companies Act, 1913 would not prejudice general application of S. 6 of General Clauses Act. 1897 with regard to effect of repeals specified in 7th Sched of Ordinance XLVII of 1984--A winding up petition, held, would not abate on repeal of Companies Act, 1913--No inconsistency relating to winding up of unregistered company present in S. 271 of Companies Act, 1913 and in S. 444 of Companies Ordinance, 1984--A petition filed under repealed Act would be deemed to have been filed under provisions of Companies Ordinance, 1984. (d) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1.984)-- ---S. 444(1)(iii) & (3)--Winding up of unregistered company-­Requirements--Winding up petition of unregistered company including a foreign company under S. 444(1)(iii) would not require that said company had been carrying on business in Pakistan or had an office or a place of business in Pakistan--For winding up petition of a foreign company under S. 444(3) of Companies Ordinance, 1984, requirement, held, would be that such foreign company had been carrying on business and had assets in Pakistan and that petitioner seeking winding up was creditor of said company. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. v. A.G. fur Motor and Motorfahrzeugbau Vorm Cudell & C. (1902) 1 K B 342; In re: Lloyd General Italiano (1885) 29 Ch. D 219; Dairen Kisen Kabushiki and others v. Shiang Kee (1941) 70 Lloyd's List Law Reports 51; Tovarishestvo Manufactur Liudvig v. Rabenek (1944) 1 Ch. 404; Banque Des Marchands De Moscou (Koupetschesky v.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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