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

-1- 

IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT B3fiGA;c§Ef* *

DATED THIS THE 22"'rwqvaf-QcTQéfié"éod§ ;.'

BEFORE I

THE HON'BLE MRs.JUsT:Cg B v.NasARA?gNAV'

c._;No.534£:o0a_
A_*» IN ,_". _v 
CO.P;NQ;131[1997au*_

........--un.n»-an-sum.--. :  - 1 ' - ' v . ~'

OFFICE OF ?HE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR
HIGH coURT'0F=KARNATAKA;*4"*EXOOR
9 & F WING, KENDRIzAxsADnN~»"
KGRAMANGALA, BANGALQRE+55Q~o34

.» '._'-5 V ' ..APPLICANT

(Bi sR;'néEPAK ; sRi V JAYARAM, ADVS.,)

. . . RESPONDENT

“éH:fifAPPLICATIN IS FTLED UNDER SECTION

462Lo£ THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 R/W RULES 11{b}

OF THE (IQ-‘IPANIES (COURT) RULES, 1956

V. ‘–.VPR’P~.XING TC) APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE
%.AccouNTs 03 THE OFFICIAL EJQUIDTOR FOR THE

_ 2 _

HALF YEAR ENDING
REMUNERRTION AND ETC.,

THIS APPLICATION C0M:Né.°dNT”EbR.zofibE§s

THIS nay, THE couar MABE THE ECLLOWINg;_

Auditor’s refiéft écfiépt§&; Auditor’s fee

is fixed ig_§e;ma of §n§€§;dér;3ated 8.6.2007

passed ifi”OLfi1M§[21L}2Q07f V

Requirem§nt* of Sé¢ti6fi ‘§62(S) of the

Companies Act iéaqispéaééfi with.

vRpc¢fiiingly3afihe_application is allowed.

Sd/–

Jtuigna

31.3.2008 Anmf}Er%« H:su’°