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

The UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY OF PAKISTAN LIMITED vs The HOD, ADJUDICATION-I, ADJUDICATION DIVISION, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD Ss — 2025 CLD 872 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2025 CLD 872 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN
Year
2025
Reporter
CLD
Parties
The UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY OF PAKISTAN LIMITED vs The HOD, ADJUDICATION-I, ADJUDICATION DIVISION, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD Ss
Provisions referred to
S. 156; Insurance Ordinance

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

The UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY OF PAKISTAN LIMITED VS The HOD, ADJUDICATION-I, ADJUDICATION DIVISION, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD Ss. 156 & 166---SRO No. 1545(I)/2019 dated December 6, 2019---Insurance of public property, matter of---Violations---Penalty, imposition of---Powers---Sub-delegation---HOD-Adjudication---Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan ('Commission') penalized Appellant (Insurance Company) on a complaint lodged by National Insurance Company Limited (NICL/Complainant) for underwriting insurance policies of vehicles of a public sector entity (PASSCO)---Appellant raised objections regarding SRO No. 1545(I)/2019 dated December 6, 2019 ('the SRO') including that the delegation of powers under S. 156 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 ('the Ordinance, 2000') to Commissioner Insurance, HOD-Adjudication-I and Wing Head Adjudication-1 tantamount to sub-delegation of the Commission's powers---Validity---Filing of a complaint to seek clarification regarding the SRO had no bearing on the merits of the case and it appeared that while relying on such ground, the Appellant was trying to evade the due process of law---Through the SRO, powers under the different administered legislations of the Commission had been delegated to the Commissioners, Heads of Department and Wing Heads---Section 156 of the Ordinance, 2000 was a penal clause that was delegated to different persons to adjudicate the matters involving violations of the substantive provisions of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000---Sub-delegation was the process whereby a delegate further delegated powers delegated to him, to any third person, but in the present case, the Commission had directly delegated its powers to different persons including the Respondent---Preamble of the SRO was self-explanatory that the Commission had delegated its powers through the SRO to different officers, so the question of sub-delegation did not arise---Thus, the Appellant's objections were mis-conceived---Appeal, filed by Insurance Company, being merit-less was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLD

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