HIRA TEXTILE MILLS LTD. vs BANK AL-FALAH LTD — 2022 CLD 285 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2022 CLD 285 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2022
Reporter: CLD
Parties: HIRA TEXTILE MILLS LTD. vs BANK AL-FALAH LTD
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 256; S. 257

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

HIRA TEXTILE MILLS LTD. VS BANK AL-FALAH LTD. Ss. 256 & 257---affairs of company, investigation of---Filing of complaint---Locus standi---Petitioner company assailed show cause notice issued by Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan to appoint inspectors to investigate its affairs---Validity---If at all Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (Commission) was to investigate into the affairs of a company on an application, it must be an application made by one of the persons or entities mentioned in S. 256 of Companies act, 2017 and none else---Respondent Banks were not entitled to make an application under S. 256 of Companies act, 2017---Cognizance of matter relating to investigation could not be taken by a circuitous route, that is, by firstly receiving a complaint and thereafter (upon finding it to be outside the ambit of S. 256 of Companies act, 2017) invoking its powers under S. 257 of Companies act, 2017, whimsically and unreasonably, to serve a notice on petitioner company---Power to be exercised by the Commission under S. 257 of Companies act, 2017 had to be preceded by formation of an opinion and thereafter a show cause notice giving the company an opportunity of hearing could be issued---No formation of opinion by the Commission against petitioner company which was conspicuous by its absence---High Court set aside the show cause notice as the Commission acted mechanically on a complaint filed by creditors of the company which was reflexively treated and did not apply its mind while forming an opinion--- Constitutional petition was set aside, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLD

2022 CLD 1051 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIMADINA BREEDING (PVT.) LIMITED VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY S. 1---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Envi…
2022 CLD 626 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHISINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY VS DIAMOND RESIDENCY through Owner/ Chief Executive Officer Ss. 17 & 1---Initial environmental examina…
2022 CLD 502 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIARIF BELGAUMI VS SINDH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (SEPA) S. 17---Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Environmental…
2022 CLD 233 ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-TRIBUNAL-KARACHIRAFHAN MAIZE PRODUCTS COMPANY LTD. VS DIRECTOR GENERAL, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH Ss. 11, 13 & 14---Prohibition o…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED S. 5(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963 [since repe…
2022 CLD 970 SUPREME-COURTSHEZAN SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS SHEZAN BAKERS AND CONFECTIONERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED Ss. 6, 8(a) & 10(1)---Revised Trade Marks Rules, 1963…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English