Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 3087 2003 SLD 3087 = 2003 CLD 1713
Lahore High Court
Civil Original No.95 of 2002 and Civil MiscellaneousNos.215/L and 225/L of 2003, decision dated: 12-06-2003.
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR, J
Farooq Amjad Mir for Petitioner (in C. M. No. 215 L of 2003).Saleem Sehgal for
Respondent (in C. M. No. 225 L of 2003).

CAPITAL ASSETS LEASING CORPORATION LTD. erVs.INTERNATIONAL MULTI LEASING CORPORATION LTD. --Respondent

Law: Companies Ordinance, 1984

Section: 282 L, Part VIII A Ss.282 A to 282 M

(a) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984) --Ss. 284 & 287 Petition for recall of order sanctioning scheme for amalgamation of companies Objection as to jurisdiction of Court to sanction scheme not raised in the petition High Court ignored such objection.(b) Pleadings Grounds not taken in petition could not be allowed to be urged during arguments.(c) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984) --Ss.282 L, Part VIII A Ss.282 A to 282 M (as added by Companies (Second Amendment) Ordinance (CXXIII of 2002) w.e.f 15 11 2002 & 284 Scheme for amalgamation of non� Banking Finance Companies Jurisdiction of High Court �Scope Under S.282 L of Companies Ordinance, 1984, for passing resolution approving such scheme, two third majority in value of shareholders was required, while under S.284 thereof, three fourth majority was required �Jurisdiction of High Court not taken away by Part VIII A of the Ordinance, but was still intact and could not be considered to have been ousted merely by implication.Aftabuddin Qureshi and another v. Mst. Rachel Joseph and another PLD 2001 SC 482; Muhammad Bashir and 2 others v. Muhammad Firdaus and another PLD 1988 SC 232 and Governor, N.W.F.P. and another v. Gul Naras Khan 1987 SCMR 1709 ref.(d) Jurisdiction--Exclusion of jurisdiction of Court not to be readily inferred Statute should not be construed as to oust or restrict jurisdiction of Court, unless very explicit words are used in statute itself in that behalf Such an intention should not normally be imputed to Legislature.Muhammad Ismail and others v. The State PLD 1969 SC 241; A. Hamid v. Hussain Hyder, Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, West Pakistan, Lahore and another PLD 1971 Lah. 858; Muhammad Aslam v. The State PLD 1967 Lah. 810 and Raja Maula Dad Khan, Advocate v. West Pakistan Bar Council, Lahore and another PLD 1975 SC 469 rel.(e) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)-�Ss.284 & 287 Expression "amalgamation" �Connotation Such expression includes in its fold an arrangement or compromise between company and its members or class of members for becoming shareholders in another undertaking True effect of amalgamation is that when two companies amalgamate…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register