Find a Lawyer

PAKISTAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY versus APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SECP

The amount of Rs. 10 million as required under Section 33 Insurance Ordinance (2000 XX 2000), Section 29 (2) (3) and 36 mutual insurance company financial quality payments under section 29 (2). The collection was instructed. ) The accuracy requirement of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 disclosed that the minimum deposit under section 29 (2) (a) of the Insurance Ordinance 2000 must be more than 10 million or 10% of the insurance company's paid-up mutual insurance. The company's capital means that it has to deposit Rs 10 million. Definition section of the Insurance Ordinance 2000 does not control the meaning, meaning of defective life insurers and the basic provisions of the ordinance for all insurers. Across the board, specific financial capability was implemented that aimed to establish their financial and business reputation. Legal interpretation requires the submission of cash by the insurance company with the State Bank of Pakistan and legal compliance with the High Court refuses to interfere with the demand raised against the company.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• MUNAWAR KHAN v. State 2010 YLR 1815
• IMRAN ULLAH KHAN v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER 2010 YLR 1819
• MUHAMMAD SHAFI v. State 2010 MLD 1820
• POLICE STATION CITY, DISTRICT LAYYAH v. State 2010 MLD 1824
• MUNIR AHMAD BHATTI v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR through Secretary 2010 CLD 1829
• GHULAM MUHAMMAD v. State 2010 MLD 1830
• Mst. GHUFRAN BEGUM v. C.D.A. ISLAMABAD 2010 CLC 1835
• MUHAMMAD MUNIR AHMAD v. State 2010 MLD 1838

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

list of advocates from Barkhan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes