Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD LAEEQ versus SINDH ALKALIES LIMITED

Sections 302 and 325 Companies (Court) Rules, 1997, R126 The termination of the company injured the auction of assets and the government assistant was directed to sell the company's assets by inviting cell tenders and lenders. Invite claims from The highest bidder and demanded the recovery of his bid amount on the basis that he was not aware of the company's dispute regarding its title in the matter of land. Accuracy was aware of the bidder's title dispute and agreed to buy the property where it had a basis. The bidder also filed a statement stating that he was ready to buy the property in question despite the dispute regarding the lease / title validation and also the amount of the bid submitted by the High Court by the respondent. Is directed to confiscate. Government assistants were instructed to advertise for sale of underground land for the remainder of the lease period with the plant and machinery. All taxes and liabilities will be payable by the auction buyer. High Court directs government official to approach provincial government for renewal of expired lease

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• AWAL KHAN v. State 2009 PCrLJ 102
• TRADING CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN 2009 CLD 102
• GHULAM MUHAMMAD v. State 2009 YLR 103
• MUHAMMAD ZAHID v. State 2009 MLD 103
• AZIZ SHAH v. State 2009 YLR 106
• Mst. RUBINA v. State 2009 PCrLJ 107
• NETWORK LEASING CORPORATION LIMITED v. NSA-CTI CONSORTIUM 2009 CLC 108
• Mst. BANO v. SULEMAN BHUTTO 2009 YLR 110

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

famous high court advocate from Dandot lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes