0
KARACHI, June 22: A judge has ordered seizure of a water tanker allegedly involved in an accident case in which the husband of the plaintiff was killed.
The order was passed when a civil suit filed by Amir Maqsood, advocate, on behalf of Razia Rahim Bux, widow of the deceased, for the recovery of Rs3,000,000 under the provisions of the Fatal Accidents Act of 1855. Muhammad Younus and Shafiqur Rahman are the respondents.
When the matter came up before Ms Kausar Sultana, IVth Senior Civil Judge, she ordered issuance of fresh notices to the defendants. In the meantime, the SHO Saddar police station was asked to attach and impound the water tanker bearing No QA-6427 which was allegedly involved in the accident, resulting in the death of the plaintiff’s husband, Rahim Bux, on December 22, 2001. The SHO has been asked to submit his report on the next date, ie, July 5.
The officer concerned of the excise and taxation department, motor registration wing, has also been asked not to transfer the above vehicle in favour of any other party till further orders.
The plaintiff contended that the defendant No 2 was driving the vehicle in a careless manner rammed into a motorcycle near Gora Qabristan, resulting in the death of the plaintiff’s husband.
A criminal case was registered against the defendant No 2 vide FIR No289/2001 under sections 320/427 of PPC dated 22-12-2001 at Saddar police station, and the defendant No 2 was booked for the offence of rash and negligent driving resulting in the death of Rahim Bux. The vehicle was impounded which was later on released and handed over to the defendant No 1 on his application on Supardaginama.
The plaintiff had filed the suit along with an application under order 38 Rule 5 of CPC, read with sections 151 and 94 (b) of CPC.
SECP APPEAL: An appeal has been preferred before the Appellate Bench of the Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) by Akram Ghanchi, a former chief executive of Growth Mutual Funds Ltd, in which he has impugned the order of imposing a fine of Rs230,000 by the executive director (specialized companies division) of the SECP, Islamabad, due to non- compliance or violation of Rule 76 (4) of the Companies Ordinance of 1984 and Rule 8 (c), 15, 16 of the Investment Companies and Investment Advisors Rules of 1971.
Counsel Saalim Salam Ansari, representing Mr Ghanchi, has taken the ground that all records regarding the transferor shares and other records related to the share department was in order. The share-holding pattern was also narrated in the balance sheet for the year 2001-2002.
The fine was imposed under section 22 of the Securities & Exchange Ordinance of 1969, which provided for penalty or fine. It can be imposed due to refusal or failure or non-compliance due to contravention of the provisions of the ordinance of 1969, whereas the fine was imposed due to no compliance with Rules 8 (c), 15 and 16 of the Investment companies & Investment Advisors Rules of 1971.
The appellant maintained that the allegations of trading of securities not routed through the Custodian Bank, pertained to the period prior to his joining date. Furthermore, the executive director had travelled beyond her province, while passing the order imposing the fine upon the appellant.
