CLD 2024

2024 PLP 1447 (CLD)

YUSRA MEDICAL AND DENTAL COLLEGE (PRIVATE) LIMITED — Appellant Versus OFFICER AUTHORIZED, SECP and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan
Decided Date
2024-February-6
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2024 PLP 1447 (CLD)
Forum / Court Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan
Bench Members N/A
Parties YUSRA MEDICAL AND DENTAL COLLEGE (PRIVATE) LIMITED — Appellant Versus OFFICER AUTHORIZED, SECP and others — Respondents
Primary Law Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2024 PLP 1447 (CLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2024 PLP 1447 (CLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2024 PLP 1447 (CLD) (YUSRA MEDICAL AND DENTAL COLLEGE (PRIVATE) LIMITED — Appellant Versus OFFICER AUTHORIZED, SECP and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 33

Appeal before the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan

Maintainability

Bar contained in S. 33 of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act, 1997

Scope

Appellant / Company was aggrieved of the order whereby the matter was sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan ('the Commission') as a representation

Appellant filed an appeal under S. 33 of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act, 1997 ('the Act 1997') before the Appellate Bench, with, inter alia, prayer of setting aside of the Investigation Report

However, the Appellant Bench Registry declined to register the appeal in view of the bar contained in S. 33 of the Act 1997 ; in response thereof, the appellant had requested to place the matter before the Bench to decide the question of maintainability

Contention of the appellant was that the present appeal was maintainable as the impugned order went beyond the scope of the Representation Order

Validity

Record revealed that various corporate issues leading to the dispute regarding shareholding/directorship of the appellant/ company existed amongst the two rival groups in the appellant/ company and there was a multiplicity of litigation pending before the various fora

It also appeared from the record that a constitutional petition was filed by the appellant before the High Court wherein it challenged the investigation report and the said constitutional petition was dismissed by the High Court

It was evident from perusal of said self-explanatory order of the High Court that the legality of the investigation report had already been determined

Perusal of the prayer of the appellant in the present appeal clearly showed that the present appeal was merely an attempt to directly/indirectly call in question the investigation report, the fate of which had already been determined by the High Court ; thus, the same could not be questioned again before the Bench

Bench was not convinced with the submissions rendered by the appellant as the same had failed to make out a case for admissibility of the present appeal

Appeal filed by the company, being non-maintainable, was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

This Order is in Appeal No. 17 (13)/Misc/ABR/2022 (Objection Case) filed by M/s. Yusra Medical and Dental College (Private) Limited (the "Appellant") under section 33 of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act, 1997 (the "SECP Act).

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant is aggrieved of the order dated June 14, 2022 (the "Impugned Order") passed by Respondent No. 1 in pursuance of the order of the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court dated December 17, 2021 (the "Representation Order") in Writ Petition No. 2622 of 2019 wherein the matter was sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (the "Commission") as a representation. Subsequently, the Appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Bench (the "Bench"), however, the Appellant Bench Registry, vide letter dated November 02, 2022, declined to register the appeal in view of the bar contained in section 33 of the SECP Act. In response thereof, the Appellant vide letter dated November 14, 2022 has requested to place the matter before the Bench to decide the question of maintainability.

3. The authorized representative of the Appellant stated that the instant Appeal is maintainable under section 33 of the SECP Act as the same is against the Impugned Order passed by two officers of the Commission. He argued that in view of section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, connotation of the words 'an officer' used in sub-section (1) of section 33 of the SECP Act include plural as well and the same cannot be interpreted in a manner just to give it a meaning in singular. With respect to his prayer in the instant Appeal, the authorized representative of the Appellant submitted that the same is aggrieved of the Impugned Order on the basis that it goes beyond the scope of the Representation Order and vide instant Appeal has inter alia prayed for setting aside of the Investigation Report dated October 06, 2017 (the "Investigation Report").

4. The Bench has heard the argument and perused the record. It transpires from the record that various corporate issues leading to the dispute regarding shareholding/directorship of the Appellant Company exist amongst the two rival groups in the Appellant Company and there is a multiplicity of litigation pending before the various fora. It also appears from the record that Writ Petition 409/2019 was filed by the Appellant before the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court wherein the Appellant challenged the Investigation Report and the said writ petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court vide its order dated December 17, 2021.

5. The Bench questioned the authorized representative of the Appellant as to how the instant Appeal, wherein setting aside of the Investigation Report has been prayed, is maintainable while the order dated December 17, 2021 passed by the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court in Writ Petition 409/2019 holds field. In response, the authorized representative of the Appellant submitted that the said writ petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court on the issue of maintainability. In this scenario, it would be worthwhile to have a glance at the order dated December 17, 2021 passed by the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court in Writ Petition 409/2019, and the operative part of the same is reproduced as hereinunder: "

4. In view of the above, it appears that the investigation report. issued by the investigators/inspectors appointed by SEEP under Section 265 of the Ordinance for purposes of SECP, is yet to be acted upon. In the event that the petitioners are aggrieved by any such actions, they have appropriate remedies under law and the investigation report in itself does not provide an independent cause of action to the petitioners.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to make out the case that the investigation ordered under Section 265 of the Ordinance was not duly authorized and has also failed to point out any provisions of the Ordinance, which have been breached in furnishing the said investigation report.

6. In view of the above, the petition is not maintainable and is dismissed." (emphasis provided)

6. It is evident from the aforementioned self-explanatory order of the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court that legality of the Investigation Report has already been determined and the same cannot be questioned again before the Bench. Perusal of the prayer of the Appellant, in the instant Appeal clearly shows that the instant Appeal is merely an attempt to directly/indirectly call in question the Investigation Report. the fate of which has already been determined by the Hon'ble Islamabad High Court vide its order dated December 17, 2021. Thus, the Bench is not convinced with the submissions rendered by the authorized representative of the Appellant as the same has failed to make out a case for admissibility of the instant Appeal.

7. In view of the foregoing, the instant Appeal is hereby dismissed for being non-maintainable. MQ/22/SEC Appeal dismissed.