1991 PLP 1510 (CLC)
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1510 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Mamoon Kazi, J |
| Parties | |
| Primary Law | Insurance Act (IV of 1938)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1510 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Insurance Act (IV of 1938)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1510 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Mamoon Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1510 (CLC) (). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Umar Qureshi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 19th February, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Ss.3, 27‑A, 53 & 110‑‑‑Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984), S.305‑‑ Winding up of Company‑‑‑Registration of Insurance Company was cancelled on account of certain violations allegedly committed by the company‑‑‑Company instead of filing appeal against cancellation of registration as provided under law, filed suit which was dismissed‑‑‑Company thereafter filed application for winding up of company‑‑‑Notice was served on Authorities for such application, but no one appeared or filed any objection on behalf of Authorities concerned despite various adjournments‑‑‑No reply or objection having been filed against application of petitioner company and none having been present on behalf of respondent Authority, petition for winding up of Company was granted accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
"(a) The company is commercially insolvent as is evident from the documents filed herewith and the admission of the company on oath. (b) The company failed to make reinsurance arrangements, which is a mandatory requirement of law. (c) The Company did not challenge the cancellation orders of the petitioner in Appeal as provided under the provisions of Insurance Act (IV of 1938) and those cancellation orders became effective in the year 1986. (d) The company filed Suit No.773/87 before the Hon'ble High Court which has been dismissed vide order dated 29‑1‑1989. (c) The continuance of the company is prejudicial to the interest of the policy‑holders. (f) That it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up. (g) That the statutory period of six months from the date on which the cancellation took effect, has already expired vide subsection (5‑D) of section 3 of the Insurance Act, 1938 (IV of 1938) and no appeal, as provided under the Insurance Act, 1938 (IV of 1938) is either filed by the company or pending in Court." Notice in respect of the petition was served upon the respondent but no reply/objection has been filed by the respondent to the instant petition. Today, when the case has been called no one is present on behalf of the respondent. It is pertinent to point out that on the last two hearings also none had appeared for the respondent when the case was called, with the result, that it had to be adjourned each time. Since no reply or objection has been filed against the petition and none is present on behalf of the respondent, this petition is granted and the respondent company is ordered to be wound up. The Official Assignee is appointed Official Liquidator to perform all consequential functions and exercise powers under the Companies Act, 1984. J. Miscellaneous Application No.22 of 1989 also stands disposed of. H.B.T,/C‑203/K Petition granted.