CAPITAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN
Mb Ombudsman's Complaint against the Offer, Sections 2 (xxvii), (xlvi) and 127 (2) of the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Insurance Company, for the refusal of payment of a claim to the Federal Insurance Ombudsman under its performance guarantee. The order permits such a complaint by the insurance company's premise that such an expiration guarantee was not payable. It was part of the default bail issuer. The agreement between the parties is a guarantee and not an insurance contract, so the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to maintain such a complaint. Justification / Insurance Policy \ and Guarantee Agreement ????? There were two different articles that could be entered into the insurance contract in the case of insurance company premium. In the guarantee or performance bond agreement the buyer had to pay the commission, which did not cover the entire amount of the contract, the buyer would be required to pay the guarantee amount to the guarantor insurance company in case of insurance of the guarantor, the death of the insured. In the event of payment of only two or installments to the insurance company, the insurance company will be obliged to pay the entire premium by the insurance company and the insured person, despite the maturity of the insurance policy, will be covered by the guarantee contract insurance. The contract was not a performance bond / guarantee contract, which the insurance company n Ennis Bond / Guarantee 30 11 was valid until 11 2005, and then within 15 days of the expiration of the claim when the respondents were reportedly on 14 12 2005 The claim, which was allegedly received by the insurance company's office on 14 12 2005.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
