Office Of The Official Liquidator vs Nil on 24 October, 2008

- 1 - .

IN THE HIGH comm OF KARNATAKIA AT   -

DATE}? THIS THE; 24*" my OE QcTcBER'--:é'f-X33  

BEFORE: V
THE I-ION'BLE MRs.Jus'i'_Ic:j3 B"'v1"r:AGAI§ii.--*Ijr:IIzgV 
c.A.No.395'Z*2t§;8_ T % V

BETWEEN

OFFICE or 'I';§I~:"*;;>£**E*I€:.IAL-"I.I;:f3Ij_Ii:>2-xrz=o.:é
HIGH coukfitwogj  1..4"§V FLOOR

D & F rs_1r:~, ' ' i:I;N§5RII&z§ " SABER
;<oRz3.1~zANGALR., .BP«;NGALQREj-E360 034
 -   K1  ...APPLICANT

(BY4§5'RII..DEII;i1E'A}x{ '§§ SR1 V JAYARAM, ADVS.,)

. . . RESPONDENT

APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

..f=£62*oE’ THE: COMPANIES ACT, 1956 RM RULES 11{b}
AN’D._298 es’ TRIS} COMPANIES (com?) RULES, 1956
PEAYING T6 APPOINT AN AUDITOR T0 AUDIT THE’.
_Ar:CuN’rs OF THE’. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR FOR THE

_ 2 –

HALF YEAR ENBING 31.3.2008 AND WFiX ffi1S
REMUNERATION AND ETC., .:'”t~.’» ‘

THIS APPLICATION- COMING ON “fififi V§RDE$S=

THIS nay, THE COURT MADE THE’FQLLDWINQ§ Vv»

ORDER ”

u

Auditor’s report ac§épted;p Fm§i€Q£;s fee

is fixed in termgngf tfié”5fi§é; daiéd”3.6.2007

passed in OLR No.2i1/2505i , ”

Requifiémefit_ §f~\Séction 462(5) of the

Compafiie$*Ac£_i$’digfiénsed with.
__Accdr§ingiy;.the application is allowed.

%%%%% Sd/_
Iudge

2% bkV