Find a Lawyer

IN THE MATTER OF: MESSRS CRESCENT KNITWEAR LIMITED versus IN THE MATTER OF: MESSRS CRESCENT KNITWEAR LIMITED

Failure to hold Sections 158 and 476 Annual General Meeting, Appointment of a fine company for which, failing to comply with the requirements, has to hold its Annual General Meeting for the relevant year within the stipulated time; Was introduced and its directors, including the chief executive, ask them to explain the reason why the penalties under section 158 (4) and 476 of the Companies Ordinance 1984 cannot be imposed on them. , But the directors and chief executives of the aforesaid notices received no response. Despite deliberately refusing to appear before the commission, he was given two opportunities for a hearing by the commission which he failed to take advantage of. The annual general meeting was held even after the issuance of the company showcase notice default. Failure to do so was deliberately and knowingly protected under the circumstances The ordinance of companies as investors / shareholders was one of the main objectives of 1984 if the interests of investors were protected. So they will provide badges to save money and they will invest more. His interest was protected by the delivery of timely, appropriate and meaningful information, and these were annual and interim accounts that provided information to investors about the affairs of the Company. The Annual General Meeting was a forum where investors invested freely. Speak as they were able to talk and have important opinions. Issues regarding approval of accounts, appointment of auditors, selection of directors, etc. were not observed by the directors of the company that solicitors from Bannu lawyer