ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The judgment and order dated 31.07.2017, passed by the Jammu and Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressel Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission), is challenged in this appeal. 3. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the stocks insured were under-valued and that the Commission has manifestly erred in law in disallowing the amount deducted by the Surveyor on account of under insurance. 4. The stocks were insured for a total sum of Rs. 10.00 lacs and it is admitted by the parties as well as the Surveyor in his report that the loss was total. 5. One of the condition of the insurance policy provides where the property is of greater value than the sum insured, then the insured shall be considered as being his own owner for the difference and shall bear a rate able proportion of the loss accordingly, but where such fire or destruction or damage is not less than 85% of the collective value of the property insured, the above condition shall not be of any purpose or effect, meaning thereby that the condition of the under valuation would not apply where there is a total loss or the loss is above 85% of the collective value of the property. 6. In the case in hand as per the Surveyors report, the loss is total but even then on account of under insurance 68.69% was deducted which amount has been disallowed by the Commission on the basis of the above condition which has been quoted in the order itself. 7. Accordingly, in addition to the claim of the respondent accepted to the tune of Rs. 2,87,227/- by the insurance company and additional amount of Rs. 5,67,773/- has further been awarded by the Commission. Thus accepting the total claim of Rs. 8,55,000/-. 8. In view of the above condition, contained in the policy, we are satisfied that the Commission has not committed any error in allowing the deduction on account of under insurance. 9. The appeal lacks merit and is, dismissed accordingly. 10. 5,67,773/- has further been awarded by the Commission. Thus accepting the total claim of Rs. 8,55,000/-. 8. In view of the above condition, contained in the policy, we are satisfied that the Commission has not committed any error in allowing the deduction on account of under insurance. 9. The appeal lacks merit and is, dismissed accordingly. 10. The statutory amount deposited as a pre-condition for filing the appeal before the Commission is directed to be refunded to the appellant-insurance company with further direction that the balance amount as per the judgment and order dated 31.08.2017, be either paid to the claimant-respondent or deposited before the Registrar Judicial of this Court within one month for payment to the claimants.