| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 343 2005 SLD 343 2005 CLD 463 |
Sindh High Court
J. M. No. 52 of 2001, decision dated: 24-11-2003, hearing DATE : 26-08-2003
ZIA PERWAZ, JUSTICE
Qazi Faez Isa for Petitioner. Arshad Tayebaly for
Respondent No. 1. Nadeem Akhtar for
Respondents Nos.2 to 30. Yawar Farooqui for
Respondent No. 31.
J. M. No. 52 of 2001, decision dated: 24-11-2003, hearing DATE : 26-08-2003
ZIA PERWAZ, JUSTICE
Qazi Faez Isa for Petitioner. Arshad Tayebaly for
Respondent No. 1. Nadeem Akhtar for
Respondents Nos.2 to 30. Yawar Farooqui for
Respondent No. 31.
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
VS
PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL LEASING LIMITED AND 30 OTHERS
Law: Companies Ordinance, 1984
Section: 290
(a) Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984)--Ss. 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 230(7) & 492 Leasing Companies (Establishment and Regulation) Rules, 2000, Rr.7(1)(ix), (2)(xii) & 19 Prevention of oppression and mismanagement Petition was moved by Registrar of Firms, in his capacity as an officer of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, against a Leasing Company alleging that special audit report had revealed that affairs of the Company were being conducted in unlawful and fraudulent manner and in a manner oppressive to the members and creditors and prejudicial to the public interest, that the approval of new Directors of the company had not been accorded by the Registrar and in that connection three show cause notices were issued to the company under various provisions of the Companies Ordinance, 1984; that the company had failed to take corrective measures; that before invoking the jurisdiction of High Court under 5.290 Companies Ordinance, 1984, the company teas provided all the opportunities required under the provisions of the relevant Rules; that the company had violated R.19 of Leasing Companies (Establishment and Regulation) Rules, 2001 which provided for information to be furnished to the Registrar; sections 230(7) and 492, Companies Ordinance, 1984 had also been invoked whereby the petitioner had sought the orders of the High Court under 5.290 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984; that present case being the first of its nature the Registrar had exercised restraint in not proceeding for the winding up of the company with the object to encourage growth of economic and financial activities and thus had made the prayers that Board of Directors, including the Chief Executive, of the Company be superseded to vest all powers of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive of the Company in a person appointed by the High Court to be competent/ qualified to handle the affairs of the company (the Administrator); that direction be issued that all assets, documents, records and instruments of the company be given under the custody and control of the Administrator to ascertain the true position relating thereto and to ascertain the true ownership of the…
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