This matter is covered by a decision of the National Commission reported in (1992) CPJ 41 (NC) (Kilaru Jogendra Narayana Prasad vs. The Divisional Manager, Oriental Life Insurance Co Ltd & others) and by a judgment dated 18.7.98 passed by this Commission in CP Case No. 71 of 1992 wherein it was held that if a person accepts an amount and gives a valid discharge by signing the receipt, he cannot later on make a somersault and cannot make a fresh claim. In this particular case on 27.9.94 an amount of Rs.71,690 was received and he accepted it in full satisfaction and discharged all his claim upon the insurance company under the policy. That being the position, there cannot be any further claim in view of the decision of the National Commission and the decision of this Commission. So, that part shall stand rejected. The next question urged by Mr. D. Choudhury, learned counsel is that burglary was on 6.11.93 arid the amount was paid on 27.9.94 and relying on the decision of the National Commission reported in 1993 (2) CPR 404 (M/s Ana Smgh Cotton Factory vs. United India Insurance Co & others) he urges 'even if full and final ^ discharge receipt is executed by the complainant, that cannot be a bar to get the interest on the amount after expiry of 2 months from the date of the report of the Surveyor. To the same effect there is a decision by the Apex Court reported in (1996) 6 SCC 428 (United India Insurance Co Ltd vs. MKJ Corporation & others) where in para 9 the Supreme Court pointed out that 2 months will be the reasonable period for the insurance company to take a decision whether the claim requires to be settled or rejected in accprdance with the policy. The Supreme Court further pointed out that it is the duty of the insurance company to appoint the Surveyor immediately and if the Surveyor is appointed after long delay and without any explanation then also the insurance company will be liable to pay interest. But it is found that the complainant does not co-operate with the Surveyor and his non-cooperation caused the delay in the survey report and accordingly he will not be entitled to interest. But it is found that the complainant does not co-operate with the Surveyor and his non-cooperation caused the delay in the survey report and accordingly he will not be entitled to interest. The first survey report was submitted on 18.6.94 by one Sri P. Adhikari and that was not accepted by the insurance company and the second report was obtained, and within 1 month from that survey report the payment was made. Accordingly, in terms of the decision of the National Commission and the Apex Court, the appellant is not entitled to interest. The appeal stands dismissed.