G.D. Sharma, J. (Oral) 1. Through the medium of this appeal order dated 28-11-2006 passed by the learned Division Forum Srinagar (hereinafter to be referred as the `Forum') has been challenged. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent had obtained a fire policy alongwith other buildings jointly and the building under dispute was shown in the insurance cover as "two storeyed in height including electric and sanitary fittings". The policy number was 48-95572, the policy came into force on 29-08-2002 and had to expire on 28-08-2003. During the currency of the insurance policy on 17-04-2003 a devastating fire broke out in the rented out rooms of the insured building which was brought under control with the help of fire tenders. The case of the respondent was that household goods as well as the other insured portion of that building were damaged. The cause of fire was leakage of gas cylinder. The claim was raised with the appellant and Mr. Shabir Ahmed Rizvi was appointed as final surveyor, who assessed the loss for single storeyed portion in the sum of Rs. 80232/- and for double storyed portion in the sum of Rs. 13348/-. The appellant repudiated the claim on the ground that only two storyed building had been insured under the policy cover, whereas the surveyor has found that the loss has been caused to a building which was partly single storyed and partly double storyed. There was thus variation in the subject matter of the insurance policy and the claim was not payable. The respondent in her complaint alleged that it was the same building which had been insured for a risk of Rs. 5.00 lakhs, but it was constructed in such a manner that part of it was single storyed and part of it was double storyed. The respondent herself has appeared in the witness box and has stated that the loss caused to the building and the household goods was in the sum of Rs. 272890/-. Mr. Bashir Ahmed who was the insurance agent of the appellant for getting the building in question insured has also been examined as a witness by her and he supported the case that the damaged building was the same which has been insured by him under the policy cover in question. Besides that, she had also examined Mr. 272890/-. Mr. Bashir Ahmed who was the insurance agent of the appellant for getting the building in question insured has also been examined as a witness by her and he supported the case that the damaged building was the same which has been insured by him under the policy cover in question. Besides that, she had also examined Mr. Abdul Hamid, civil engineer who had prepared her estimate, but the learned Forum has discarded his statement on the plea that he had deposed that his evidence stated to be on affidavit was not signed by him. No evidence was produced by OP in rebuttal. 2. On this factual matrix of the case, the learned Forum allowed the complaint of the respondent and allowed her the assessed amount to the tune of Rs. 95580/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum after six months from the date of loss till realization. Besides that, an amount of Rs. 10,000/- was awarded as compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service. The litigation expenses were awarded in the sum of Rs. 3000/-. 3. The appellant has felt aggrieved of the order and challenged the same inter alia on the ground that there is mis-appreciation of evidence because the Forum has fallen into error by holding that the damaged building was the same which had been insured under the insurance cover, but that was a different building. That the defence taken by the appellant before the Forum has not been appreciated properly. 4. Heard the arguments. 5. Mr. Dar, advocate for the appellant at the outset has contended that the learned Forum has committed a mathematical mistake in totaling the awarded amount which was assessed by the surveyor because the total amount for the damage suffered of the first storey and second storey comes to Rs. 93580/- and not Rs. 95580/-. He has also contended that though in the memo of appeal a plea has not been taken that damages could not be awarded of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the respondent, yet it is a legal question which could be raised orally because on the awarded amount the interest has been granted @ 9% per annum after six months from the date of the loss till realization. In rebuttal, Mr. 10,000/- in favour of the respondent, yet it is a legal question which could be raised orally because on the awarded amount the interest has been granted @ 9% per annum after six months from the date of the loss till realization. In rebuttal, Mr. Noor-ul-Amin has contended that the learned Forum has properly appreciated the evidence which was on the record and in the absence of any evidence lead by the appellant it cannot be said that there is mis appreciation of evidence. The written version was not supported by leading any evidence, so equally it cannot be said that the defence was not considered. While concluding his arguments, he has stated that the loss occurred on 17-04-2003 and more than 6 years time has been consumed in the litigation. The respondent who is a lady has unnecessarily been dragged into litigation and she should be compensated adequately. 6. We have considered the respective contentions of the counsel appearing for the parties and find that an arithmetical mistake in making the calculation of the damages suffered by the respondent in respect of the insured building which comes to Rs. 93580/- and not Rs. 95580/-. To this extent there is legal force in the contention of Mr. Dar. Also there is legal force in the contention of Mr. Dar that compensation should not have been awarded for mental agony and physical sufferings because that part of the award has been taken care by granting of interest. In this view of the matter, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is modified to the extent that appellant shall pay the awarded amount in the sum of Rs. 93580/- alongwith interest @ 10% per annum from the date from which it has been awarded alongwith litigation charges in the sum of Rs. 3000/-. The appeal be consigned to records and the record of the Forum be returned at once.