Find a Lawyer

PIASTISCANS (PVT.) LTD versus ICI PAKISTAN LIMITED

Axin X, R1 and Section 115 law in evidence (10 of 1984), Arts 117 and 120 suits filed by the Company Authority for tear down were resolved by the Company's Board of Directors in 1999 On the basis of the contract, the General Power of Attorney was executed in favor of the Secretary, and the Secretary was sued by the Secretary during the case on 31st 2000. The case was filed, during the trial, an application was made to decide the matter with respect to the authority. The Secretary of the trial court's dismissal of the petition for recording of the case, before recording the evidence, dismissed the Chief. In his inspection, the Chief said that the General Authority had passed the resolution on his behalf to the General Authority. Source was executed. To date, the power of attorney was not canceled, therefore, it was not claimed by the plaintiff company to pass on / work the fresh special of attorney in relation to filing a lawsuit after that statement. The secretary, who was in the trial court, moved to deny respondent that the secretary was not authorized by the Board of Directors through a 1999 resolution on which the General Power of Attorney was favored by the secretary. Was hanged. The trial court-approved order had no illegal proceedings or the weak review was denied in the circumstances advocate from Daud Khel lawyer