ORDER Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.), President: Deceased respondent Shri Gopal Singh Chauhan filed complaint against the appellant alleging therein that. since there as deficiency in service due to non settlement of his legitimate claim, therefore, direction may be issued to it (the appellant) to do the needful by1 compensating him. Respondents are legal heirs of late Shri Gopal Singh (hereinafter to be referred to as the respondent) who was complainant before the Forum below and died during the pendency of this appeal. Forum below vide impugned order dated 18.8.2003 in Complaint No. 808 of 2001, while allowing the complaint has issued directions to the appellant to indemnify the respondent in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 17.2.2003 till actual payment is made. Litigation cost was quantified at Rs.2,500/- and the entire awarded amount was ordered to be paid to the respondents within 45 days of the receipt of the copy of the impugned order. 2. Admitted facts of this case are that the respondent had got insured all kinds of shoes, sleepers and similar types of other related items kept in the shop at Nogli, built of Class A construction. In addition to this, respondent had also got his house insured with the appellant in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. On 31.7.2000 at night river Sutluj was in high spate. This resulted in washing away of number of buildings at Village Nogli where the shop as well as the residence of the respondent was situated. As a result of river getting into spate, number of building were washed away besides causing damage to the merchandise of the shopkeepers like respondent A double storeyed house together with the land whereon it stood having been completely washed away in the flood is certified by the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Bhadawali within whose jurisdiction it was situated. So far stock in trade lying in the shop having been damaged due to debris and water is also certified by the Patwari and is countersigned by the Tehsildar Similar Certificate regarding the house and land of the respondent having been washed away because of river getting into spate is also there on record. When his claim was not settled, he filed the complaint wherein above noted relief has been granted to him. 3. Dr. When his claim was not settled, he filed the complaint wherein above noted relief has been granted to him. 3. Dr. Sharma on behalf of the appellant submitted that there is no proof of the house of the respondent having been damaged as a result of river getting into spate, which flooded the area on the night of 31.7.2000. Further, according to him, in the absence of cogent and reliable evidence in this behalf being there on the file, learned Forum below fell into error in passing the impugned order holding his client liable for payment of the amount with interest He also submitted hat compensation to which respondent was entitled is only in the sum of Rs. 6,479/- as assessed by the Surveyor and Loss Assessor that too in respect of the damage caused to the stock in trade. On the other hand, Mr. Kaprate, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that when a reference is made to the evidence produced by the parties before the Forum below, no exception can be taken to the impugned award. Thus he prayed for upholding the same while dismissing the present appeal. 4. Insurance is admitted both of house as well as stock in trade. The first and foremost question therefore that arises is, whether there is any evidence to suggest that house together with the land whereon it was standing was washed away when river Sutluj got into spate due to flood on the night of 31.7.2000 or not In case the answer is in affirmative, no exception can be taken so far compensation in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is concerned, otherwise consequence are inevitable. In this behalf, when a reference is made to the report of the Surveyor and Loss Assessor produced by the appellant, it is manifestly clear that in the flood in question many buildings of this village were completely washed away due to flash floods and there was no sign of existence of these. Whereas in the opening para of his report. Annexure R.2, filed by the appellant before the Forum below, it is clear that the Branch manager, C.8.O.11, Kaithu, Shimla had called upon the Surveyor to carry out survey and assess the loss occurred in the shop of Shri Gopal Singh Chauhan on 31.7.2000/1.8.2000 due to flash floods, covered under the policy. Whereas in the opening para of his report. Annexure R.2, filed by the appellant before the Forum below, it is clear that the Branch manager, C.8.O.11, Kaithu, Shimla had called upon the Surveyor to carry out survey and assess the loss occurred in the shop of Shri Gopal Singh Chauhan on 31.7.2000/1.8.2000 due to flash floods, covered under the policy. Therefore, it is clear that no reference qua the washing away of the house of the respondent was ever made to the Surveyor and Loss Assessor whose report is relied upon by the appellant Whereas to the contrary respondent has placed on record certificate of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat stating therein that a two-storeyed house together with the land whereon it stood, was completely washed away and there was no sign of it. Similarly, Patwari Halqa has also issued a certificate to similar effect and it is countersigned by the Tehsildar, Rampur Bushahar. Both these certificate were severely criticized by Dr. Sharma on behalf of the appellant per him, no reliance can be placed on these certificates. In our view, these certificates cannot be excluded from consideration by us, for the simple reason that Revenue Officers are the first ones to have reached the spot as the part of District Administration when river was in spate due to floods on the date of occurrence. This fact coupled with the fact of buildings having been washed away without leaving any trace of their existence in the village, we are prima face satisfied that the double storeyed residential house of the respondent was completely washed away together with the land whereon it stood without leaving any trace. We may observe in this behalf that so far appellant is concerned, it cannot make any grievance regarding assessment of loss caused to the residential house of the respondent. Reason being that it had made no reference to the Surveyor and Loss Assessor to verify the extent of loss/damage if any caused to it, and respondent has not made any grievance so far damage caused to his shop is concerned. Reason being that it had made no reference to the Surveyor and Loss Assessor to verify the extent of loss/damage if any caused to it, and respondent has not made any grievance so far damage caused to his shop is concerned. There is nothing on the record produced by the appellant from its contemporaneous official records to suggest that the building wherein shop was situated and the double storeyed residential building which he claimed to have been washed away in the flash floods when river Sutiuj was in spate on the night of 31.7.2000 were not separate premises. Nothing prevented the appellant to have produced cogent, reliable as wed as legally acceptable evidence to prove that the shop was in existence wherein damaged stock in trade was lying in the building of which the residential house of the appellant was a part and parcel. 5. Faced with this situation, learned Counsel for the appellant Dr. Sharma was not in a position to satisfy the Court that the residential house of the respondent was not in existence at the spot 6. Further we feel that the appellant is bound to indemnify the respondent qua the damage suffered by the latter. Similarly we feel that the direction regarding payment of the total insured sum by the appellant to the respondent has also been rightly ordered. For taking this view, reference can usefully be made to the decision of the National Commission in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. M/S Girdhari Lal Tulsiramji Joshi, 157. This decision fairly and squarely covers the present case also. No other point was urged. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Since the appeal has been finally disposed of. all interim orders passed from time to time shall stand vacated forthwith.