B.K. Taimni, Member—Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent Insurance Company.

2. Very briefly the facts of the case are that as per the complainant he had insured his truck for Rs. 4,50,000 for the period from 5.7.96 to 4.7.96. It was the case of the complainant that truck met with an accident on the night of 9th July and l0th July 1996. The matter was reported to the respondent, who appointed a surveyor. But at the same time, the complainant got the truck repaired after incurring an expenditure of Rs. 1,94,922.82 ps. The claim preferred by the petitioner was repudiated by the Insurance Company on the ground that the accident had taken place on 3rd July 1996 and not on 9th July 1996 and since the accident took place before taking the policy, i.e., 5th July 1996, the claim was not payable. It is in these circumstances a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who dismissed the complaint on the ground that the vehicle had al- ready met with the accident prior to the date of taking policy. Aggrieved by this order, an appeal was filed before the State Commission, w