Liquidation proceedings
Liquidation proceedings legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Arrangement, during winding up proceedings, was sanctioned between impleaded company and creditor but such arrangement was not complied with
Effect
Company Judge had jurisdiction under Ss. 284 & 285 of Companies Ordinance, 1984 not only to sanction an arrangement but also to ensure its compliance and award consequences in case of its violation
Order passed by Company Judge under deeming provision on failure of sanction arrangement was an order of winding up of the company
Jurisdiction of Company Judge to pass an order reviving winding up proceedings was provided under S.285(2) of Companies Ordinance, 1984
No cogent reasons were provided by impleaded company for non-payment of terms of settlement and for High Court to provide any further indulgence to impleaded company to continue in retaining possession of the companies
High Court revived liquidation proceedings of companies and liquidators were allowed to proceed with winding up proceedings of companies
Application was allowed accordingly.
"Liquidation proceedings", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124957570
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Liquidation proceedings"
1974 S C M R 15
Seth SALAHUDDIN‑Petitioner Versus MESSRS SETH INDUSTRIES LTD. AND OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: High Court2001 C L C 307
INVESTMENT CORPORATION‑‑‑Petitioner Versus UNITED TEXTILE MILLS LTD. ‑‑‑Respondent
Court: LahoreP L D 1952 Lahore 636
through Ata Ullah, Liquidator‑Appellant Versus NASRULLAH KHAN and others‑Respondents
Court: High Court1989 P Cr
MERAJUDDIN AND MUHAMMAD ASHRAF, Directors, Messrs Pak. Skyland (Pvt.) Ltd.‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑ Respondent
Court: Karachi1994 P T D 1476
VIJAY KUMAR BUDHIA Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX.
Court: 204 ITR 3552007 C L D 1194
Messrs NAQVI DEVELOPERS and others — Appellants Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED — Respondent
Court: Lahore2023 C L D 627
MCB BANK LIMITED — Appellant Versus TARIQ AHMED KHAN LODHI and others — Respondents
Court: IslamabadP L D 1964 (W
Court: Companies Act (VII of 1911), S. 171‑Application, by third party, to continue execution of decree, or proceedings in suit, against company, pending voluntary liquidation proceedings‑ Principles regarding grant or refusal of such application‑In re Poole Firebrick Co. (1874) 17 Eq. 268 ; In re Keynsham Co. (1863) 33 Beav 123 ; Wilson v. Natal Investment (1867) 36 L J Ch. 312 ; In re Marine Investment Co. (1868) L T 535 ; McEwen v. London, Bombay and Mediteranean Bank Ltd. (1867) 15 L T 495 ; Hegal v. Curria (1867) W N 75 ; Hukumchand v. Radhakissen A I R 1925 Cal. 916 and S. N. Mukerji v. Krishna Dassi 37 Cal. W N 932 ref.
P L D 1972 Karachi 41
Miscellaneous Application No. 35 of 1968
Court: High Court1972K46
Before Ghulam Rasool R. Shaikh, J Versus THe NATIONAL COMMERCIAL BANK LTD.,
Court: improve the situation. Thus the suits which had been filed were not maintainable and no decree could be passed in those suits. It, therefore, follows that the decrees are without jurisdiction and should b: ignored. p. 290A