ORDER 1. THE RESPONDENTS PREFERRED A COMPLAINT BEFORE THE J&K STATE CONSUMER PROTECTION COMMISSION COMPLAINING OF DEFICIENCY IN SERVICES BY THE APPELLANT INSURANCE COMPANY. THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENTS WAS THAT THEIR HOUSE WHICH WAS INSURED WITH THE APPELLANT INSURANCE COMPANY SUFFERED DAMAGE ON ACCOUNT OF EARTHQUAKE AND IN SPITE OF THE CLAIM HAVING BEEN PREFERRED, THE INSURANCE COMPANY DID NOT HONOUR THE SAME AND KEPT IT PENDING FOR AN UNREASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME. THOUGH THE APPELLANT DEFENDED ITSELF DISPUTING THE ENTITLEMENT OF THE RESPONDENTS TO ANY CLAIM UNDER THE INSURANCE POLICY, HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION FOUND THE RESPONDENTS ENTITLED TO AN AWARD OF DAMAGES OF RS 2,03,605 WHICH IN THE OPINION OF THE COMMISSION WAS A FAIR ASSESSMENT OF THE DAMAGE SUFFERED BY THE RESPONDENTS HOUSE DUE TO EARTHQUAKE. THE AWARD OF THIS AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HIGH COURT IN APPEAL. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE INSURANCE COMPANY HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BY SPECIAL LEAVE. 2. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE FINDINGS THAT THERE WAS AN EARTHQUAKE AND THAT THE HOUSE OF THE RESPONDENTS SUFFERED DAMAGE TO THE TUNE OF RS 2,03,605 ARE PURELY OF FACT BASED ON EVIDENCE AND NO FAULT CAN BE FOUND THEREWITH. 3. HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION HAS AWARDED A FURTHER SUM OF RS 50,000 TO THE COMPLAINANT "AS COMPENSATION FOR LOSS AND INJURY, PHYSICAL HARASSMENT AND MENTAL TORTURE WHICH HE HAD TO SUFFER DUE TO ILL-THOUGHT ACTION OF THE FUNCTIONARIES OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY". THE AWARDED AMOUNT HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO CARRY INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% P.A. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR AWARDING THIS ADDITIONAL SUM OF RS 50,000 AND ALSO TO AWARD INTEREST AT SUCH A HIGH RATE. WE FIND MERIT IN BOTH THE SUBMISSIONS. 4. MERELY BECAUSE THE INSURANCE COMPANY RESISTED THE CLAIM MADE BY THE RESPONDENTS AND THEN DEFENDED ITSELF, A FINDING AS TO PHYSICAL HARASSMENT AND MENTAL TORTURE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ARRIVED AT AND RECORDED BY THE COMMISSION. ALL THE FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THAT REGARD ARE LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE AS BEING WHOLLY UNSUSTAINABLE. SIMILARLY, WE FIND THAT 18% RATE OF INTEREST IS CERTAINLY ON THE HIGHER SIDE. IN OUR OPINION, THE RATE OF INTEREST SHOULD NOT HAVE EXCEEDED 12% P.A. 5. THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ALL THE FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THAT REGARD ARE LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE AS BEING WHOLLY UNSUSTAINABLE. SIMILARLY, WE FIND THAT 18% RATE OF INTEREST IS CERTAINLY ON THE HIGHER SIDE. IN OUR OPINION, THE RATE OF INTEREST SHOULD NOT HAVE EXCEEDED 12% P.A. 5. THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE FINDINGS ARRIVED AT BY THE COMMISSION AND UPHELD BY THE HIGH COURT TO THE EXTENT OF AWARD OF RS 50,000 AS COMPENSATION FOR LOSS AND INJURY, PHYSICAL HARASSMENT AND MENTAL TORTURE AND ALL THE OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THAT REGARD ARE SET ASIDE. THE RATE OF INTEREST IS REDUCED FROM 18% TO 12% P.A. 6. SUBJECT TO THE ABOVESAID MODIFICATIONS, THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT OF THE STATE COMMISSION AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDING THE SAME ARE MAINTAINED. 7. THE APPEAL STANDS DISPOSED OF IN THE ABOVESAID TERMS. 8. NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.