1. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on perusal of the Company's Financial Statements it would be adequately established that it is running in a loss and unable to pay its debts as per the list attached as Annexure G/1 which is in the total amount of Rs,358.8 millions. Learned counsel further submits that the Company has not been in production for more than one year and it is not a viable concern any more since massive capital infusions would be required to run the concern.
2. Consequently learned counsel submits that under section 305 (h) of the Companies Ordinance it would be just and equitable to wind up the Company.
3. ' Mr. A.H. Mirza says that his only objection is that no Resolution was passed by the Company in a General Meeting and consequently the requirement under section 305(A) has not been fulfilled. Mr. S.Saleemuddin Nasir for the Objectors HBL and ABL also supports Mr. A.H. Mirza in this regard.
4. I have heard learned counsel. Upon perusal of the petition and Annexures filed alongwith it, it appears that the Company's debts/liabilities are far in excess of its assets and that it is not in production anymore and in the circumstances it would be just and equitable to wind up the Company. However, in my opinion, at this stage such order should not be passed since the area in which the factory is located is in Quaidabad, District Khushab, Province of Punjab whereas the publication was made in daily Dawn and Jang which may not have reached there. Consequently in the interest of justice and for the specific purpose of catering to the interests of the labour of the factory, it is ordered that the advertisement of the main petition shall be re-published in leading newspapers both English and Urdu of the Province of Punjab which are circulated in District Jhang viz. The News International, Lahore and Nawa-e-Waqt, Lahore. However, in the meanwhile the learned Official Assignee is appointed as Provisional Manager of the Company for safeguarding its assets as prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. ' At this stage Mr. S,Saleemuddin Nasir says that as per provision of section 316(1) of the Companies Ordinance even when a Provisional Manager has been appointed, permission of the Company's Judge is to be taken before any suit is commenced or continued against the Company.
6. Consequently he prays that Suit No,179 of 2000 filed by ABL against the Company in this Court may be allowed to continue. So also the Execution proceeding arising out of Suit No,544 of 2000 which was decreed on 6-11-2000 may be allowed to be filed by HBL against the Company. In the circumstances of the case permission is granted as prayed for. Adjourned to 2-10-2001 as suggested.