AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
REQUEST for adjournment on behalf of the petitioner is declined. It is the petitioner who was the complainant before the District Forum. His complaint pertains to insurance claim in respect of damage caused to the roof of his shop. It was the stand of the Insurance Company that the damage was not caused by any of the acts covered under the insurance policy and that roof fell down because there was a faulty construction. There was nothing to show as to how the roof fell down, except in the State Commission the stand taken was that it fell on account of storm, but there was no such evidence to support the case of the complainant. Accordingly, the State Commission allowed the appeal of the Insurance Company and dismissed the complaint. We find no error in the order to exercise our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Act. Revision Petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.