Office Of The Official Liquidator vs Nil on 5 November, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT.gANQ§ibRfifI"

DATED THIS THE 5"'nmy or Novfifiéfikfzécsg ' I

BEFOREIAIIII

THE HGN'BLE MRs.JUsfIcE B"v1MgGAR§THaA'

g;fi.N0.46§f209§
'_*. iN_,".I,*.
co;?;No;3e5/1993I=

BETWEEN

u..u...uuq-u--u»-u-on-u

OFFICE 0? THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR
HIGH coma? or Kaawfixfikn; 4"'ELooR
D & F wine, xsnsaizg SEDAN
KORAMANGALA, BANGALQRE~560 034

.- '_ '-F '- ...APPLICANT

..°-LBYISRI DEEPAKWKISRI V JAXARAM, ADVS.;)

.a._....'--.-an-u-on

. .. . RESPONDENT

THIS APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
1162 OF THE COMPIXNIES ACT, 1956 R/W RULES 11{b}

}v’iND 298 OF THE COMPANIES (COURT) RULES, 1956

I WPRAYING TO APPOINT AN AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE

ACCOUNTS OF THE OFFICIAL LXQUIDATOR FOR THE’.

,2-

HALF YEAR aumzue 31.3.2008 AND f?Iif5Rié:*

RBMUNERATION AND ETC.,

THIS A?PLICATION coMfi§G_ OH :F¢R{ eaqéfis?

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FoLLowING:__ “”

‘ékD£R

Auditor’s repfltt aéfi§§téd;* Andifdr’s fee
is fixed in terms q§fthé §§de§-aafied 8.6.2007
passed in °LR N5.2i1/?%b?:; *.Wf

§equiréfiéfitr~§fi”Sec€ion 462(5) of the

Companiés Act is diéfiefised with.

“<_mk¢éQrding1y, the application is allowed.

Sid/5v
.Tutkge

"f *bk§