JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner constructed a factory building and got it insured on 11.04.1991 for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- and thereafter installed the machinery in the said factory and insured it further for a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/-. Both the factory and the machinery were in the name of a Company known as “M/s Bhagirathi Industries”, although it has nowhere been pleaded and claimed in the petition as to what interest, the petitioner has in that factory, except that it has been loosely stated in para 2 that it was the petitioner who got constructed the factory building and got the machinery installed and insured it, therefore, unless it is proved otherwise it appears that the petitioner has the interest in that factory as a owner or at least a part owner of the factory. 3. Be that as it may, according to the petitioner, due to earthquake in Uttarkashi on 20.10.1991, both the factory building as well as the machinery got damaged. He raised insurance claim before the National Insurance Company Ltd., which was not met as desired by him and consequently, he moved a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Uttarkashi. According to the Insurance Company and based on the report of the surveyor it assessed the damaged caused to the factory building to ‘39,888/- and according to them, the amount was paid to the petitioner. The District Consumer Forum, Uttarkashi came to the conclusion that the loss to the factory for ‘1,30,170/- and thereafter gave an award that the said amount be given to the claimant i.e. M/s Bhagirathi Industries after deducting the amount of ‘39,888/-, which has already been given to it. 4. The petitioner dissatisfied with the order of District Consumer Forum moved an appeal before the State Commission Consumer Protection, Dehradun, which was dismissed vide order dated 08.09.2004. Consequently, aggrieved by the said order, M/s Bhagirathi Industries preferred a revision before the National Consumer Commission under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The National Consumer Commission disposed of the revision vide order dated 18.07.2007 and remanded the matter back to the State Consumer Commission for disposal. 5. In revision, on a limited question whether the amount of Rs. The National Consumer Commission disposed of the revision vide order dated 18.07.2007 and remanded the matter back to the State Consumer Commission for disposal. 5. In revision, on a limited question whether the amount of Rs. 39,888/- has been credited to the account of M/s Bhagirathi Industries or if not, whether it has been deposited with Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation (from which M/s Bhagirathi Industries had taken a loan) could not be clarified. Therefore, the matter was remanded on the limited question by the National Consumer Commission by stating as under:- “Considering the aforesaid dispute, the matter is remitted to the State Commission for deciding afresh on the limited question, whether U.P. Financial Corporation has received the said amount and given its credit to the complainant. Parties to appear before the State Commission on 19th September, 2007. The Revision Petition is disposed of as above. There shall be no order as to costs.” 6. Thereafter the matter was heard again by the State Consumer Commission and has passed the following order, considering that it could not be established that the amount of Rs. 39,888/- has been credited to the account of the petitioner:- “In view of the above and for the reasons aforesaid, appeal is allowed and the respondent – insurance company is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 39,888/- to the appellant – insured within a period of one month from the date of this order. In case, it is later on found that the said amount had already been paid to the insured through bank transaction, the insurance company shall have the liberty to recover the same from the insured by taking recourse to the procedure as is available under law. No order as to costs.” 7. I have gone through the above order and perused the record. No illegality can be found in the above order and this Court is of the view that consequently no interference is required in the above order passed by the State Consumer Forum. 8. Thus the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the National Insurance Company Ltd. shall pay Rs. 39,888/-, in case the said amount has not already been credited, to the petitioner forthwith. No order as to costs.