Find a Lawyer

SERVICE INDUSTRIES TEXTILE LIMITED versus COMMISSIONER (COMPANY LAW) SEC

Section 265 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997), Appointment of Inspector to investigate the affairs of Section 33 Company Commissioner, after providing opportunity for hearing to the appellant company, proceeded to pass an anonymous order. An inspector has been appointed under section 265 of the Companies Ordinance. In 1984, the appellant claimed that the commissioner had based his decision on the appointment of an inspector only on the central issue, namely that the appellant company of some obsolete machinery was sold in 1999, consisting of 18,700 pieces. The book, which cost Rs 120 million, but was sold by the appellant company in only 27 million, the appellant's claim was that the machinery was not only obsolete, but also scape and the sale of the machinery was authorized by the board of directors. And was approved by the participants at the Annual General Meeting. It acknowledged that the machinery sale agreement was executed about five months or that the approval of shareholders and the actual sale of the machinery had begun even before their approval. The bulk of the machinery's sales assets. , Which required approval under section (a) of section 196 (3) of the Companies Ordinance. In 1984, the sale of machinery was not only the sole reason for the appointment of an inspector, but also many other things that required practice to find out the fact that the appellant company's affairs were being run in accordance with appropriate business principles and Playing with a plan. And no loss of shareholders Appellant Company annually announces to shareholders since 2001 advocates from Bagh lawyer