SC dismisses appeals against SHC order in TRG shareholding dispute

The dispute revolves around a challenge to a June 20, 2025 SHC judgement, in which the SHC had allowed an application of former TRG CEO Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti to be filed under company laws.

In its order on June 20, 2025, the SHC had ruled that shares held by GTH in TRGP (the respondent) were the property of TRGP, and would be deemed to have been purchased by the latter from its shareholders.

The court had also ordered TGRP’s Board of Directors to issue notice for an extraordinary general meeting of the company immediately to elect directors, adding that the new board of directors would decide whether to retain or cancel these treasury shares after the elections.

A three-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Naeem Akhter Afghan alongside Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, rejected three appeals against the SHC’s order on Monday, and directed that the appellants would jointly bear the legal costs of respondent No. 1 (Chishti).

The SC, in its short order, granted leave to appeal in “C.P.L.A. No.2543/2025 titled ‘Greentree Holdings Limited, Hamilton HM11, Bermuda v. Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti, etc.’; C.P.L.A. No.871-K/2025 titled ‘The Resource Group International Limited (TRGI) v. Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti, etc.’; and C.P.L.A. No.872-K/2025 titled ‘The Resource Group Pakistan Limited (TRGP) v. Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti, etc.’”.

“The petitions are converted into appeals, which are all dismissed. The appellants shall jointly and severally bear the respondent No.1’s costs in the said appeals,” said the short order, authored by Justice Aurangzeb and announced in the open court on Monday.

In the same case, case files had been reported stolen in 2025. GTH, which had filed the petition before the SC last June, was informed by the court office on July 14 to immediately file its petition again, along with three paper books in each case, to avoid any inconvenience to the court after the case files were stolen.

The reason cited by the court office suggested that while transferring the case to the Principal Seat of the SC in Islamabad through a courier service, the vehicle carrying the case files had been robbed and the subject petitions stolen.

This incident was also mentioned by Justice Afghan during a hearing on August 26, where the court was told that the files of the case were not stolen, but rather a robbery was committed.

On June 25, 2025, a two-judge SC bench consisting of Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan and Justice Aamer Farooq, while granting status quo, had ordered the issuance of notices, with a direction to the parties to file concise statements.