Find a Lawyer

LT.-GENERAL (RETD.) ALI KULI KHAN KHATTAK versus COMMISSIONER (CLD) SEC

Irregularities in Sections 178, 179, 184, 186, 472, 476 and 495 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997), Section 33 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (Appellate Bench Procedure) Rules 2003, R3 Complaint against Appellant's Board of Directors' Choice, which claims to be shareholder of the company, filed a complaint before the Securities and Exchange Commission claiming that the appellants were denied the opportunity to exercise their legitimate rights in the elections. had gone. That despite having a 14% stake in the company, none of their representatives were elected to the board and the company's management considered the Company's directors to deny the complainant / appellant's right to participate. Was making a choice. Six months before the current director's terms expired before the election, the complainant / appellant sent a notice of intent to contest the company, but it was stated that the company had issued the notice and declared it invalid. ? Under the wrongful appellant of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 complaint, the appellant whose notices were rejected and the petitioner was not allowed to file an appeal before the Securities and Exchange Commission Commissioner found that the wrong provision of the ordinance was mentioned. The company did not have the notice and it could not. Rejected by the Company on such technical grounds, but the Commissioner nevertheless did not interfere in the matter of the fact that the election of directors had long since passed, and that the option of directors was non-existent. Has the power to legislate, not approved by the Commissioner pakistani advocates Balakot lawyer