ORDER Mr. Justice K.D. Shahi, Chairman—This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company against judgment and order dated 7.2.2003 whereby the complainant The Rishab Valveleen Ltd. was allowed the compensation of Rs. 1,19,000/- along with interest and compensation of Rs. 5,000/- towards mental agony, and Rs. 1,500/- towards legal expenses. 2. The complainant has got a factory, which was insured for Rs. 12,20,47,000/-. The complainant was paying annual premium Rs. 3,74,153/-. During the insurance period the flocking machine/generator caught fire due to short-circuit and damaged the machine. It was not repairable. The information was given to the Insurance Company but the claim was not disposed off. 3. The appellant had sent Surveyor Sh. J.S. Mehta who with the consent of the complainant recommended for payment of Rs. 1,19,000/- as amount of compensation. This is the amount for which the learned Forum has allowed the complaint. Since the claim was not disposed off by the appellant in spite of several requests, he filed the complaint. 4. The insurance is admitted. Policy is admitted. It is further admitted that during the insurance period the fire took place. The Insurance Company has also admitted the break of fire in flocking machine and generator and also receipt of information regarding the fire. It is pleaded that the claim has been repudiated. 5. The learned Forum by detailed judgment allowed the compensation against which order the appeal has been filed. 6. The complainant has demanded a sum of Rs. 2,56,605/- as price of the machine because it could not be repaired in India. It had to be imported as a whole from foreign. But the Surveyor had agreed for a claim of Rs. 1,19,000/-. 7. According to the appellant the claim was liable to be repudiated because the fire took place due to short-circuit and according to the terms of the policy in such a case the claim was liable to be repudiated. Therefore, the exemption clause of the policy was referred. It reads as under : “Loss of or damage to any electrical machine, apparatus, fixture or fitting (including electric fans, electric household or domestic appliances, wireless sets, television sets and radios) or to any portion of the electric installation, arising from or occasioned by over-running, excessive pressure, short-circuiting arcing. Therefore, the exemption clause of the policy was referred. It reads as under : “Loss of or damage to any electrical machine, apparatus, fixture or fitting (including electric fans, electric household or domestic appliances, wireless sets, television sets and radios) or to any portion of the electric installation, arising from or occasioned by over-running, excessive pressure, short-circuiting arcing. Self-heating or leakage or electricity from whatever cause (lightning included), provided that this exemption shall apply only to the particular electrical machine, apparatus, fixtures, fittings, or portion of the electrical installation which may be destroyed or damaged by fire so set up”. 8. We have read the exemption clause and there is also a proviso clause in the exemption clause and that is that this exemption clause shall apply only to the particular electrical machine, apparatus, fixtures and not to other machines. Thus according to the case of the party the short-circuiting was at the installation supply cable and it travelled into the machine and damaged it. Thus the exemption clause shall apply to the installation as the supply point and not to the machine where it has travelled. There was no short-circuit in the machine. 9. The complainant referred the ruling reported in II (1993) CPJ 196 (NC)=1993 CPC 692, United India Insurance Company v. Ram Prasad Aggarwal. In this ruling also the complainant has got a shop insured including a Xerox Machine, which was destroyed in fire. His claim was rejected by the Insurance Company alleging that the burnt item fell in the exemption clause of the policy and damage was caused to the appliances due to electrical short-circuit. As per report of the Surveyor there was spark on account of failure of electrical part of Servo Stabilizer. It is said that spark has nothing but heat and flame. In this particular case the five travelled and that was nothing but heat and flame. Similar was the provision of exemption clause in the ruling as well. In this ruling as well the National Commission held that exemption clause shall not apply. The facts of the said ruling are similar with the facts of the present case. 10. The complainant has already been allowed lesser amount of compensation on the report of the Surveyor. There is no question of interference in the order. In this ruling as well the National Commission held that exemption clause shall not apply. The facts of the said ruling are similar with the facts of the present case. 10. The complainant has already been allowed lesser amount of compensation on the report of the Surveyor. There is no question of interference in the order. However, in the remaining portion of the order there is one meaningless clause that 10% interest has further be paid if the amount is not paid within 30 days. Therefore, this order is to be quashed as, there cannot be compensation against compensation and interest cannot be paid twice on the same amount. The appeal is to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. However the last line of the order that if the payment is not made within the due date the opposite party shall be entitled to get simple interest @ 10% on the price of the flocking machine in deleted. Costs of the appeal shall be easy. Appeal dismissed. ––