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

ft

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARMATAKA Ai Bg§QfiL¢§E,u"'k

DATED THIS THE 22" DAY 09 G¢T6BERE2dd§ F 
Bgfggg 2 _ ._. 4
THE HON'BLE MRs.JUsTicg B V RR53RBfHNA

c;A;ND;§§§g2G

e5"iN': ;, ,,__
go;9.xo;9;;986afK

BETWEEN _ ;

OFFICE 0? THE QFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR
HIGH COURT Oz%'j'--»&:A22:~1A:''2x§<.zs.; 4:" FLOOR
D & F wine, KENDRI¥A*$ADAN
KORAMANGALA,'aamgagcnamsso 034

.. '_ '-* = ...APPLICANT

"~.(B¥fisR1'a$E9Ak"é"sR: v JAYARAM, ADVS.,)

-annwnnné-«want-«nan

. . .RESPONI)E}N'I'

AA  THIS PsPPLICATI@~l IS FILED UNDER SECTION

 q§62*oE THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 R/W RULES 11(5)

 298 OF THE CO1'-i9?xNIES {COURT} RULES, 1956

 "-~-"PRAYING TC APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE
ACCOUNTS OF THE GFFICIRL LIQUIDATOR FOR THE



-2-

HALF YEAR ENDING 31.3.2008 AND FIX HIS
REUNERRTION AND ETC.,

THIS APPLICATION COMING on FOR ,0§QgR3
THIS DA¥, THE COURT MADE THE FoLLow1N§:»jgz.»

ORDER

Auditor’s report accépted,3 figditdrfsufgé

is fixed in terms of {fig Qfdéf dat§d 3g6;250?W

passed in OLR No.21l/2Q§?;_,

IRequitémefit_”of~_section 462(5) of the
Companigs*Ac£.i$’digfiénsed with.

A@c§fding1y, the application is allowed.

SELL.

Tutkge

‘ bkv