Find a Lawyer

TARIQ BAIG, MANAGING DIRECTOR, TARIQ GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD versus EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SM), SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD

Companies Ordinance 1984 Sections 224 and 222 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLI of 1997), Section 332 of the Company Ordinance, pursuant to section 222 of the Company's Chief Executive of the Transaction Profit Query Appeal to Appellate Bench of Commission Trading by , 1984 The Appellant's intention was that the shares were purchased in good faith and the loan was already contracted. The appellant took the contentious position of entering into the settlement of the shares and purchasing the shares, which she was not legally bound to. As an honor, the same cannot be said for securing debt consolidation security, which shows the fact that appellant's maladies benefit from a buyback @ Rs. 10 bucks when it comes to market The value of Rs 18 was the failure of the appellant to record the claim that the profits from such transactions were paid to the company on interest-free debt and, consequently, only if the shares were purchased. There would have been a different situation, but the way the shares were bought and sold shows that the same was done to earn a profit, which was legally Was not presented to the company on. This litigation was over, it was also not true that the appellate bench of the Commission upheld the impugned order if there was no merit in the appeal. online advocate from Ahmed pur Sial lawyer