MUHAMMAD AHMAD versus ASSOCIATE ENGINEERING CONCERN (PVT.) LTD.
Ordinance 1984 Sections 305, 309 and 9 (3) of the Companies' Request for amalgamation of the Company from the shareholders who are allegedly withheld on the Registrar of Companies, Luxi Standy, to make such petition. That was based on the entries in the share register of the company. At a later date, the share certificate itself was in no way conclusive evidence, the shares from the shares could be substantiated from the entries in the appropriate title share register, so, even if the share certificates were available to the applicants, this would help them. Will not Before the changes were brought to the share register it has been proved that they were not involved in giving the shares a legal title. Applicants contend that the defendants had used rigor or coercion in obtaining documents that were part of the transfer of shares, and that such matter should be decided as such. According to Companies Ordinance 1984, S: 9, conditions cannot be summarized. For reasons, repression and repression can be decided only by recording evidence and extensive investigation of factual and complex questions of law. In regular proceedings before the civil court, which could more properly be a court of complete jurisdiction, the petition for termination of the company was not admissible.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
online advocate from Gari Mori lawyer
