DOMINION STOCK FUND LIMITED versus DIRECTOR (NBFC DEPARTMENT.), SECP
Section 265 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997), Section 33 Appeals to the Appellate Bench of the Company, investigating the affairs of the Company, appealed to the Appellate Bench of the Commission Company, in which they were found to have committed certain acts of corruption, Inspector. Was appointed to investigate the matter. The Company and Company Affairs had filed an appeal against the appointment of the Inspector Validity Commission, the Companies Ordinance was given the authority to appoint the Inspector under section 265 of the 1984 Act, if it is satisfied that any of the provisions of sub-clause (i) Have been assigned. (vii) In response to the showcase notice of section 265 (b) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, the appellant was summoned, alleging facts against him was not denied, in fact the appellant raised irrelevant and irrational arguments. Responded to a showcase notice. A regulator was obliged to look at the affairs of the regulatory bodies, to ensure that they were not managed in the morning. An element that will deprive its members of their reasonable return on investment. That the company's affairs were conducted in accordance with the contractual business principles and business practices, etc. The provisions of section 265 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, clearly gave the Commission powers that it was trying to use in the matter, with no authoritative grounds to prevent it. However, according to the order of inquiry by the director of the commission, the inquiry was modified to the extent that the investigation would be conducted by a team comprised of officers authorized by the commission, to be appointed by the director.
Related judgments — Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, 2010
