" . 'RESPONDENT.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 04th DAY OF NOvEMBE1§,I:”A« V.
BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I
COMPANY APPLICAT1(}’N RIO; ‘C0310;/#0032 ”
COMPANY PETITION NO; 2125./_2’Oo:3
BETWEEN :
M/S EIKO COMPUTERS PV’1?DL’TL%. _
REPRESENTED BY OFE1C1AL,’,’L1QU.1~DAT.fOR;-
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAIKA; 1 I,
CORPORATE… DHAVAN, 1;2’r..H’ FLOOR;
RAHEJA TOWERS, N.O’.26e2 7, .M;jO. ROAD.
BANGALORE-I-560″ ‘O0 1 _ , H. … APPLICANT.
(SR1. V*,JAY’A”R”AM ADVS. FOR OL)
AND: A
1.» NIL
~. TH’j_:3:–_. ‘COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION OF’ THE COMPANIES ACT, I956 READ WITH
RULES”–A 11{b) AND 298 OF THE COMPANIES (COURT)
RULES. 31956 PRAYING TO APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO
AUDIT THE ACCOUNTS OF THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR
A FOR”_«THE HALF’ YEAR ENDING 31-03-2009 AND FIX HIS
‘REivIUNERATION AND TO PASS ORDERS AS REGARDS
LN
THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 462(5) THE
COMPANIESACT. 1956. 3
THIS CA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, r-EH3
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ” ‘ *
Auditors report is acr;eptefii’*,af1d 3°j;j2(e.Ci
terms of the order date’d*..:8’«6_–2OU’?. in OLR
No.21}/2007. The 1re’V:’c1:_1«_1’re1’_-.iV(‘3;1_t’VA Lu 1;-:iV..eV$AI*~–..Sectio1″1A 462(5) of the
Companies Act, 1956 is
Compizny §§}5pii.cafib1n is .g’aiSjp0sed’Vbf.
Ln