Kathmandu. Himalayan Reinsurance Company is gradually getting into trouble. At this time, the chairman of the company has also resigned. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is also in India due to health problems.

At the same time, Rohit Gupta and Amit More have resigned from the company’s directors. As a result, the company has become legally problematic. Even though the company is in trouble, the regulatory body Insurance Authority has not yet decided what to do. A source at the Authority said that although discussions are being held in the board about what to do, a decision has not been taken yet.

The company does not even have a president now. The CEO is on leave. The listed company is without a leader. Some other operators are under the radar of the Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police. The CIB has remanded Deepak Bhatta, the founder shareholder of the company, in custody for 10 days on the charge of money laundering.

The Department of Money Laundering is now investigating further. The absence of the chairman and CEO of the company and the proximity of the investigation of the board of directors have attracted ‘C’, ‘E’ and ‘G’ of Section 101 of the Insurance Act 2079 to the company.

Section 101 of the Act states that the insurer is considered to be in trouble. Section 101 (c) of the Act states that if the promoter shareholders of an insurance company are proved to have established an insurance company through fraud, money laundering, corruption, financial investment in terrorist activities and human trafficking. The company’s founding shareholder is Infinity Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Bhatta has already been arrested. He owns 45 lakh units of shares in Himalayan Reem.

Similarly, Section 101 (e) states that “if the act is done repeatedly in a manner which is contrary to the interest of the insured, shareholders, insurers or the general public,

‘g’ states ‘in case this Act or the rules, by-laws, prevailing laws, conditions mentioned at the time of issuance of license or directives or orders issued by the Authority are violated time and again’.

On September 23 and 24, the Hiltel Hotel was vandalized and set on fire during the Jenji protests. The Insurance Authority has already taken action against the company in this case. There is a legal provision that the management insurance authority will take the company for some time by declaring it problematic. For this, a clarification should be sought within 15 days under sub-section 2 (1) of Section 101 of the Act. Clause 1 of 2 states, “Before declaring a problematic insurer, the Authority shall give a notice of fifteen days to the concerned insurer to submit its explanation along with the evidence, if any, that it should not be declared as such insurer.”

Article 3 of 3 states that if the clarification is not submitted within the period referred to in sub-section (2) or if the clarification submitted is not found to be satisfactory and reliable, the Authority shall declare the insurer as a problematic insurer and make the information public through at least two national dailies and the website of the Authority.

Pujan Dhungel, director and spokesperson of the Insurance Authority, said that the issue would probably be discussed in the authority on Sunday. He said that the decision should be taken by the board of directors of the authority even if the company is declared problematic.