IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 04th BAY OF NOVEMBEET . V.
BEFORE I In is I
THE HODPBLE MR. JUSTICETRAM.
COMPANY APPLICATION 'No.1' '2§o OP1'2O'I;s.3I
COMPANY PETITI_ON No.3 OF '1'-:IIS3i.__'"'
BETWEEN: ' I
M/S GURU IN\zEsTMEN'I"s.':(P}_LTE;.j_,' 3
REPRESENTED BY OFFICIAL LI(;~UIDA'lI_)RV j
HIGH COURTOFAKARNATAKA;*P. _ '
CORPORATE BI~{AVAN. 1;2'rr--I FLQOR;~.,'".._ .
RAHEJA TOwP;Rs:;;.m'O.2e.-27; M.C_; ROAD;
BANGALORPESSQ EOE * ._; APPLICANT.
(SR1. DEEPAKEE V. FOR OL}
AND:
1 _--NIL ...RESPONDENT.
Ti~I:Isa” EOMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER
‘sE’CTIO2.\:_ ‘462_O_E THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 READ WITH
‘I-RUTLES–.1–«1_{b;;-AND 298 OF THE COMPANIES [COURT]
ULES. 1’9::’j_i65; PRAYING TO APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO
AUDIT _TI*IF34~”‘ACCOUNTS OF THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR
FOR HALF YEAR ENDING 3]»O3–2009 AND FIX HIS
‘–._II'”REMUNE3RA’I’ION AND TO PASS ORDERS AS REGARDS
.’S’v»THE«–.T REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 462(5) OF THE
R COMPANIES ACT, 1956.
M
THIS CA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS D;§.Y.Ti~IE3
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: .
Auditofs report is accepted and’ his fee.__”is«_fi xedV in
terms of the order dated 8–6?2f):0?
No.21.1/2007. The requireme’I’:L.i’: unde1; of the
Companies Act, 1956 is.qisper1éed fi&fi.fh?;.._
Company a_pplicat.i9fi is dfi,s;§,os??§(i. {)T;’. ”