MESSRS QURESHI VEGETABLE GI4EE MILLS, MANGLA versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR, EXCISE AND TAXATION, MIRPUR
The nomination papers for the nomination papers of Section 14 of the People Act 1976 were rejected by the Returning Officer on the basis that he had failed to repay the loan received from the bank candidate, who was one of the four directors of the company. Had taken Of the 8,000 shares held by the bank, the company had only one thousand shares and the value of its shares had not exceeded fifty percent. The defendant failed to argue that the candidate held shares of the company with his spouse, sons, daughters and dependents. The objection, which did not exceed the value of 51%, did not say that the candidate had borrowed from the bank on his own order, rejecting the nomination papers of the candidate approved by the Returning Officer, was not manageable and in the circumstances. Was responsible for setting aside.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
