Find a Lawyer

ZULFIQAR HUSSAIN versus BAMBINO (PVT) LIMITED

Sections 305 and 309 Damage to Company There was no response, response or retaliation from the Company Damaged Company. The company's Validity Auditors also expressed their opinion that there was material uncertainty about the company's ability to maintain its capacity as a concern, but despite service, the defendant / company did not proceed to the dispute. Or dismiss the allegations as raised in the petition, the High Court directed the company to be terminated and it was officially liquidated so that it could take further action in accordance with the law.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012

• UNITED BANK LIMITED v. PLASTIC PACK (PVT) LIMITED 2012 CLD 239
• Mst. FARZANA v. Mst. SEHTI 2012 PLD 241
• SONO v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary Government of Sindh 2012 PLC(CS) 249
• NIAMATULLAH KHAN v. THE STATE through Anti-Narcotics Force, Sindh 2012 YLR 251
• Mst. AMINA BAI v. Mrs. NAFISA ZAKARIA 2012 PLD 258
• ALL PAKISTAN SECURITY AGENCIES ASSOCIATION (APSAA) through Secretary v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Human Resources Development 2012 PLC 258
• MUEEN AFTAB SHAIKH v. THE STATE through FIA KARACHI 2012 PLD 261
• DAWOOD ISLAMIC BANK LIMITED v. ADMORE GAS (PVT.) LIMITED 2012 CLD 263

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2012 →

famous lower court advocate from Chowk Azam lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes