PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

H.G. MARKETS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs COMMISSIONER-SMD, SECP Ss — 2024 CLD 1381 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2024 CLD 1381 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN
Year
2024
Reporter
CLD
Parties
H.G. MARKETS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs COMMISSIONER-SMD, SECP Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

H.G. MARKETS (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS COMMISSIONER-SMD, SECP Ss. 57, Cls. (a) to (f), 123(8) & 123(10)---Provisions relating to standards of conduct , non-compliance of---Appellant (a futures broker of the Pakistan Mercantile Exchange /PMEX)was penalized by Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan ('the Commission')---Allegation levelled by the complainants was that they had given discretionary authority to the employees of the appellant to trade in their accounts and the employees of the appellant indulged in excessive trading with the sole objective of generating commissions resultantly they lost all or a significant part of their investments---Contention of the appellant was that the statements of the complainants had no evidentiary value merely because of the reason that the same were not subjected to cross-examination---Validity---There were complaints and statements of the complainants on the one hand and on the other there were statements of the traders/employees of the appellant, who were given DTAs/login IDs and passwords by the complainants---Contention of the appellant was misconstrued as cross-examination of witnesses was not mandatory in Show-Cause Notice proceedings---Moreover, the said contention of the appellant appeared to be self-contradictory in the context of the statements of the traders/employees of the appellant who were also not subject to cross-examination and yet mere statements of the same were wrongly termed by the appellant as ones carrying evidentiary value to support the stance of the appellant---Appellate bench modified the impugned order to the extent that the penalty imposed upon the appellant vide impugned order was reduced to Rs.3,500,000/---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English