Find a Lawyer

IN THE MATTER OF: M/S. QUICE FOOD INDUSTRIES LIMITED versus IN THE MATTER OF: M/S. QUICE FOOD INDUSTRIES LIMITED

Failure to enforce the Annual General Meeting of the Articles 158 and 476 Fines, which failed to hold its Annual General Meeting within the timeframe set forth in terms of Sub-section (1) of 5158 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984. Failure to comply with the Company stated that under section (4) of the Companies and Ordinance, a compulsory requirement against the Company and its directors was declared necessary. ? In response to the showcase notice, the company offered some specifications but did not find credible directors and chief executives who deliberately avoided the Securities and Exchange of Commission's director (enforcement), knowing the company's default. Was understood and deliberately and reasonably estimated that the company's chief executive and directors failed to protect the interests of the shareholders, a situation in which the company's commission directors were responsible for Hold an annual general meeting on time as this is the only forum for shareholders Oops reporting where they can discuss, comment on and discuss important issues. In the past, the company management also committed such commitments for which penalties were imposed on the company's chief executive and directors, and directors, in addition to collecting most of the penalties for the company's former defective directors. Had failed, had no respect for the law and instead of imposing a fine of Rs 50,000 on each of the directors of the company, the company within a fixed time limit of the Securities and Exchange Commission criminal advocate from Gaggo Mandi lawyer