Find a Lawyer

PROGRESSIVE CONSULTANTS (PVT.) LTD versus CORPORATE LAW AUTHORITY

Section 37 (1) (3) (4) and 484 (2) of the Companies (General Provisions and Forms) Rules, 1985, R5 the jurisdiction of the registration order of the company by the provisions of section 37 (l). Approved. 3) The Companies Ordinance, 1984 applies in the case of fresh registration and the jurisdiction of the Commission is exercised directly before the registration of the provisions of section 37 (2) of a Company Ordinance 1984, Is. Registration phase of a company which wishes to be registered with the name of the existing company with the same name as the existing company, along with the approval of the exemption granted in the dissolution process, along with the approval of the registrar of the company. Used if a company is named before it is registered, violates any of the three provisions of section 37 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, under the provisions of section 37 (4) of the Commission Rd. The Commission is the ultimate and sole arbiter. Nance, 1984 Where the Commission exercises its jurisdiction before the registration of a company under various sub-sections of section 37 of the Ordinance of Companies, it acts on behalf of the management and the Companies Ordinance 1984 Section 37 (4). Its decision is final. The possibility of revising such order is also not ruled out under section 484 (2) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, regarding the final opinion of the Commission when authorizing a name before registration of a company. To be allowed, the Commission itself expresses such an opinion under section 37 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, if the commission is provided on an application under R5 of the Companies (General Provisions and Forms) Rules 1985 Information on outgoing us immigration advocates from Mirpur Khas lawyer