Law: Insurance Ordinance, 2000

Section: 2(xvi),122(3),125,127,75,156

Law: Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act, (XLII of 1997)

Section:

Insurance Ordinance (XXXIX of 2000)-------Ss. 2(xvi), 122, 125 & 127---Order passed by the Appellate Bench of Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan---Review---Scope---Complaints of policyholders regarding Insurance matter---Jurisdiction of Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan---Messrs State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan sought review against the order passed by the Appellate Bench of Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan---Applicant (Insurance Company) contended that the Bench did not consider the fact that S.122(3) of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, explicitly bars jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan to entertain the complaints of policyholders---Validity---Contention of the applicant was misconstrued, as S. 122(3) of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, bars the jurisdiction of a Court (as defined in Cls. (xvi) of S.2 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, and not the Commission which is empowered to entertain the complaints of policyholders under the provisions of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, and the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act, 1997---Moreover, pertinently Ss. 125 & 127 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, deal with appointment, jurisdiction, functions and powers of the Insurance Ombudsman, respectively, which does not in any manner intervene with the powers of the Commission as envisaged under the law---In the instant matter, the applicant admitted that higher cash surrender value was shown to the policyholder due to a malfunction of a software program and inter alia for the said reason direction to compensate the loss suffered by the policyholder was issued and penalty under Ss.75 & 156 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, were imposed vide impugned order---As the Bench vide impugned order had already determined the question of jurisdiction in view of facts of the matter, thus the Bench was of the view that the applicant failed to highlight any anomaly or illegality in the impugned order, hence, the same did not require any interference in review jurisdiction of the Bench---Review application was dismissed, in circumstances.Date of hearing: 22nd June, 2023.ORDERThis…