High Court Karnataka High Court

Office Of The Official Liquidator vs Nil on 22 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Office Of The Official Liquidator vs Nil on 22 October, 2008
Author: B.V.Nagarathna

_ 1 – _

IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT sAN¢A$§éExfa

DATED THIS THE 2?” DAY_QF_OCTGBE§m2fi0S)V= ”

BEEOREQ
THE HON’BLE MRS.JU$TlCE fiat NAG§R3THNA5

C.A.No.5§§;ggg_
.’>x IN ‘~i RU
§Q;E£fih$%%2EQQ”a
BETWEEN : ~»’: .’-1

OFFICEWOFVTHEgQEFICiAL.fifiQ$IQATOR

,H:GHjcoUR$joF fiARHA$AKA,’4′” FLOOR

D a F WING, gENDRIYA~saDAN
KORAMANGALA,Vaawsngoagwseo 034
K~” ‘* “A» *. …APPLICANT

(BX SR1 Dmaégk & SR1 V JAYRRAM, ADVS.,)

m;.ro-»–..H.<u-

. . .R§JSE’ONDENT

“rfixs AP@LICATION Is FILED UMBER SECTION

;,462no€ THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 R/w RULES 11{b)
* ARE 298 as THE COMPANIES {COURT} RULES, 1956

PRFKYING TO APPOINT RN AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE

“* _§ccoUNTs 0? THE CETTCIAL LIQUIHATGR EUR THE

– 2 _

HALF YEAR ENDING 31.3.2008 AND €:Xf~3:S7

REMUNERATION AND ETC., _m~H

THIS APPLICATION comifie {ON ‘Eek, oébggéf

THIS DAX, THE COURT MAn$_$HE F9LLow:N$;_:’
Qgéég . _ 2.,
Auditor’s repo¥fi~a¢%e§féd; ,gpdi£§;’s fee
is fixed in tetms or the §$déz &§§éd 3.6.2007
passed in Q§§ $%}2il/206??; “.M;
Réguir§$éup ‘§f section 462(5) of the
companiés gs: i$”@1$§§fi$ed with.

*.fiAc§h;dingly, the application is allowed.

Shif-

Tudge

1 ‘bkv