Find a Lawyer

MIAN KHALID BASHIR versus IMTIAZ HAIDER, DIRECTOR (SECURITIES MARKET DIVISON) SEC

Sections 20 (6) (b) and (g) and 33 Securities and Exchange Ordinance (XVII of 1969), advance section R05 (1) / 2004, dated 19 4 2004, the complainant alleged to have kept The various shares have been given to the appellant for sale and the appellant sold the same, but he did not sell to the complainant. His appellant took the stand that his agent, who operated his brokerage house, was all Appellant's claim was dismissed, along with relevant records. The joint director who ordered the appellant to either return the claim to the complainant or the appellant was aggrieved by the finding of the joint director amounted to the value of the shares in the question at the specified date, he appealed to them. I challenged that the appellant's argument for dismissing the claim was filed by the complainant because his agent who operated his brokerage house had fled with all the relevant records, so the complainant's claim was verified. No other source was available for the appellant's question as unacceptable and unacceptable He could not refute the assessee's claim on the basis that the appellant's agent fled with the record because a principal was solely responsible for the actions of his agents and could not plead innocent. ? Due to differences with his agents, the appellant's admission that the complaint was a civil matter and should be referred to a civil court was only an attempt by him to avoid liability, where the matter was straight forward. Appellant's brokerage firm sold. Complaints how to become a advocate from Kumbh lawyer