Sections 111 (3) and 112 (3) (6) of the Insurance Rules, 2002, R19 (3) fail to comply with the license terms of the licensed surveyor Some misleading text in the survey reports submitted by the survey company The Company was involved, in the circumstances, in contravention of the provisions of Sections 111 and 112 (3) of the Insurance Ordinance 2000 in which the survey report was issued for which it did not have the registered authorized surveying officer directors of the company In addition, this company was operating day to day, and in its management of its business, there were certain duties, namely the duties of trust and the legal space of those duties. Which some believe will expand the duties imposed by the criminal offense, the fines were levied against the directors or accountability of high quality must be punished by imprisonment was required. In carrying out his duties with caution, and with proper responsibility, in the present case, he failed to perform his duties with proper care, and directors should be aware of their legal issues. In relation to the legal requirements set forth in Sections 111 and 112 of the Insurance Ordinance 2000, it may be presumed that the provisions of Sections 111 and 112 (3) (c) of the Insurance Ordinance 2000 were deliberately and intentionally defaulted. , The Company Commission also accepted the exercise of the powers granted under Section 1112 (6) of the Insurance Ordinance 2000, revoked the Company's Insurance Survey License \ r \ n
Related judgments — Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, 2013
