M/S Universal Commercial … vs Nil on 4 November, 2009

'O V"  -RE'SP'ONDENfr.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 04th DAY OF NOVEMBER, Ejoofef __

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM_1MOIIAN"P:uEDDYA.V 

COMPANY APPLICATION NO.  OE zobai"  '

IN.

COMPANY PETITION NO; S2 /90]  

BETWEEN:

M / S UNIVERSAL COMMERCIAL 
REPRESENTED BY OFFI'ۤ;AL~ L1QIIIDATOR,"

HIGH COURT_0F._KARNATAK!I,  '~ .j 
CORPORATE. i3HAVAN.. '1.2T1I PLOQR,'
RAHEJA TOwERS';- "1'\?Q,2'6}--2'7',-- . ROAD.
EANGALOREASSCIQOI.    

.. . APPLICANT.
(SR1. D:EEPAI§5&;SRI«..%v-.« ADVS. FOR OL}

AND:

1 ..  NIL

4'%'C-OOMPANY APPLICATION IS FELED UNDER

1.

:~3E’CfI”ION .3}S2″;=OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 READ WITH

RULES AND 298 OF THE COMPANIES [COURT]
RUL’ES,'”g«1956 PRAYING TO APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO

II..:;;-.__”–AUDIT ACCOUNTS OF THE OFFECIAL LIQUIDATOR
I FOR_THE HALF YEAR ENDING 31-03-2009 AND FIX HIS

M

REMUNERAHON AND TO PASS ORDERS AS REGARDS
THE IUKJHREMENT (M? SECTKHJ 46m5) OF ‘nus
COMPANIES ACT, 1956.

THIS CA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS *

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

oRnEKo**

Auditor’s report is accéphagl and his foe in = ‘

terms of the order dated %_S}fe:~,2oQ7 Opasépd fin OLR

No.21 1/2007. The reqvz,:”i1″.Srr_1Ae1;O-1L1; t.jmVC1’érVLjvSoCtrjon 462(5) of the

Companies Act, 1956 iSv(§Li.S}.’.¥€::13S_é’dA”\KC(‘.1′[:.1’1.’§’_ ”
cxnnpaigfafipfiggfiaggéruépésedfot