HABIB ULLAH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE versus EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ENFORCEMENT)
The Ordinance of Section 33 Companies (XLVII of 1984), the Company's annual audited accounts for Sections 476 and 492 the relevant year, revealed that $ 51 million had been offered for the purchase of the house, as a guest house Will be used. The correspondence between the company and the Securities and Exchange Commission for company officials revealed that the company had made a false statement stating that the house had been purchased as a guest house for its employees, but the fact is This house was in the personal use of the chief executive. The Company Company Officer also made false and inaccurate statements in his account sent to his shareholders and the general public and, through his various communications companies, failed to present false facts to the Commission, to show that The Chief Executive Officer was permitted to abide by the Company's policy of misconduct by the Company, which in the event of infringement was the section 492 of the Companies Ordinance, the Executive Director of the Commission (Enforcement) of the Company. Not satisfied with the answer, every director of the company fined Rs. Not imposed, appeal cannot be interrupted, in the circumstances
Related judgments — Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, 2013
