Find a Lawyer

MRS. TANIS AKHTAR versus AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN, THROUGH MANAGER

Section 9 and 21 Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), Section 316 (1) Failure to obtain permission from Judge Bank, a bank loan recovery company, sued the plaintiff company and its directors / guarantors for collecting bank loans. The plaintiff company was injured by the company was appointed judge and temporary manager. Judge Bank Bank requested the bank to file a petition for permission to continue proceedings before the banking court against the plaintiff company for collection of the bank loan. But no such suit was filed by the bank suit in the favor of the Banking Court. . The Bank Plays made by the Directors / Subsidiaries were that without seeking permission, as mentioned in section 316 (1) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, the Banking Court could not pass any order when the order to fold or temporary was passed. If the manager was appointed, a suit or other legal action in the proceedings will be held only against the company under section 316 (1) of the Ordinance 1984, and no further action can be taken except for the leave of the court, If a party wishes to initiate or continue proceedings, then he must file an application under section 316 (1) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984. Shall, before the company would ask the judge to allow this action. And proceedings against the Company and the court may allow such, under certain conditions, the Company Judge to continue the proceedings and proceedings with the Bank and the Banking Court, which had been seized for restitution. Allowed The Banking Court cannot initiate or prosecute a mere and only defendant company. famous lower court advocate from Head Marala lawyer