ORDER

1. The appellant had filed a claim before the National Commission against the respondent Insurance Company for damages under four heads:

2. The claim before the Commission was that the earthquake which is alleged to have taken place on 28-3-1999 had been insured against and that the damages suffered by the appellant were the direct consequences of the earthquake and within the insurance policies issued to the appellant.

3. The claim before the Commission was filed on 26-12-2001 after the respondents ultimately rejected the appellant's claim in respect of three of the heads noted above and partially allowed only one, namely, for the machinery breakdown. The Commission by its order dated 18-7-2002 refused to entertain the application on the ground that the controversy could not be resolved in a summary manner without recording elaborate evidence. The appellant's case before us was that the National Commission was fully empowered to decide matters which required elaborate evidence and has relied upon a decision of this Court i