2018 PLP 1332 (CLD)
PRIME CAPITAL MANAGEMENT (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus COMMISSIONER (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD — Respondent
| Citation | 2018 PLP 1332 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | PRIME CAPITAL MANAGEMENT (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus COMMISSIONER (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 1332 (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 2018 PLP 1332 (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: 2018 PLP 1332 (CLD) (PRIME CAPITAL MANAGEMENT (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus COMMISSIONER (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kamal Ali, Additional Director (SMD) and Asif Khan, Deputy Director (SMD) for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 33
Dismissal of appeal for non-prosecution
When appeal was called for hearing, representative of respondent was present, however, neither anyone appeared on behalf of the appellant nor any request for adjournment was received
Matter was kept pending till the close of official timings, however, the appellant failed to enter, despite calls
From the conduct of the appellant, it appeared that appellant was not interested in pressing the present appeal
Appeal was dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
1. This Order is in the matter of Appeal No. 42 of 2017 filed by the Prime Capital Management (Pvt.) Limited (the Appellant) against the Order dated 26/05/17 passed by the Commissioner (SMD) (the Respondent) under Securities Brokers (Licensing and Operations) Regulations, 2016 read with Securities Act, 2015.
2. The Appeal was fixed for hearing on 14/09/17, which was attended by the Appellant's representative Mr. Muhammad Ali Raza. After the hearing, the case was adjourned for decision. However, the Appellate Bench (the Bench), thereafter asked the Registrar of the Bench to re-fix the case for further necessary clarifications. In view of Bench's direction, case was re-fixed for hearing on 20/04/18 and 07/06/18 respectively. The Appellant was informed about the hearings through separate hearing notices however, no one appeared on behalf of the Appellant. It is also important to note here that Appellant CEO and representative were also informed through telephone to attend the hearing. The CEO and the representative committed to attend the hearings, however, all was in vain. On 07/06/18, the appeal was called for hearing at 9:30 a.m.; the Respondent representative were present, however, neither anyone appeared on behalf of the Appellant, nor any request for adjournment was received. The matter was kept pending till the close of official timings however, the Appellant failed to enter despite repeated calls. From the conduct of the Appellant, it appears that it is not interested in pressing the present Appeal therefore, the Appeal is dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution, without any order as to cost. HBT/17/SEC Appeal dismisse