Find a Lawyer

FERPZ-UD-DIN versus PAKISTAN HOTELS DEVELOPERS LTD.

The Companies Ordinance 1984 Sections 305 and 306 on the termination of the company claim the company petitioners to issue shares of the company's rights, claiming that although they owned 25% of the company and also had a director, Yet in their absence such a decision was taken and they were not informed. Respondents, however, are keeping track of the decision with the TCS receipts on the record letter indicating that the applicants were told about the meeting and that they had attended the meeting but the rights There was no objection to the sale of the shares and other matters unanimously resolved for public declaration The applicants claim that they learned of the issuance of rights shares in March, 1995. That the advisor was required to pay a specific fee, after complying with all the formalities related to such a case. Shares issued 1 1 1995 was in the newspaper. The same was decided by the Board of Directors in which the applicants also participated, but the petitioner cannot be allowed to complain about the payment in such a way that the applicants are concerned that the shares of rights. Will not attract buyers, therefore, they will be assigned by the respondents, gaining the lead with the applicants, misunderstood, any shares not sold, will still be the rights shares. And they will be presented to the shareholders of interest in proportion to their shareholding. The court ruled that the respondent would issue the publication of certain shares to the applicants lawer from fb area from Jaffarabad lawyer