NASIM BEG versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN
Section 224 (2) of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), sections 42 and 54 of the Company's directors, officers, and principal shareholders, at the discretion of the court regarding the establishment or right bar relating to such declaration trading, section 224 (2) show cause notices. ) Declaration challenging the issuance of showcase notices to the plaintiff by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 and suit for permanent injunction, Ordinance of Companies, Section 224 of 1984 (2) The plaintiff sought to maintain such a case under the contract that he had no sense of remittance and / or any other benefit and was therefore entitled under section 224 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 Was not responsible for tendering the money, claiming that the declaration sought by the plaintiff was not in respect of any legal role. The fact that the plaintiff submitted a detailed response to the notice issued by the SECP was contrary to its claim and the respondent did not claim that the defendant had been unlawful in the said reply. However, the action is unlawful or they are not eligible to issue defamatory notices under section 224 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984, the fact that the plaintiff has unconditionally accepted jurisdiction under the jurisdiction of the SECP. To do. For issuance of notice under the Companies Ordinance, the SECP's 1984 plaintiff should have appeared before a competent authority for a personal hearing, from which he did not seek a statement regarding the rights and status of the plaintiff. ? And declared relief can only be granted in relation to the legal role that exists
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
