IMPORTANT POINT
When there is no material irregularity in the orders passed by the lower for a, the revisional jurisdiction cannot be invoked.

These two appeals 300 of 2010 & 301 of 2010 have been filed by the appellant, M/s. Mukesh & Co. Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. against the order dated 31.07.2010 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh, (in short ‘the State Commission’) passed in Complaint Nos.2 & 3 of 2009.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an authorised agency of the government to buy Tendu leaves from Chhattisgarh State Small Forest Produce Marketing Society and to sell the same. As per agreement with the government of Chhattisgarh, the appellant was authorised to buy Tendu Patta during the period from 03.04.2008 to 31.03.2009. The appellant, in pursuance of the agreement, used to buy Tendu Patta through primary societies and thereafter to get it dried, processed and then send it to godowns in gunny bags. The appellant fixed a target to buy approximately 1600 standard bags of Tendupatta and based on the cost of Rs.2,378/- per bag, it obtained an insurance cover Policy No.450300/11/08/11/0000053 of Rs.38,04,800/- from the respondent Insurance Company covering the risk of fire, storm, typhoon, flood and inundation and other perils etc. for the period 25/04/2008 to 24/06/2008. As alleged by the complainant, during the period from 10.06.2008 to 12.06.2008, due to heavy rains, storm and typhoon, a good quantity of Tendu leaves at Koylibeda unit No.167 ‘A’ situated at Koylibeda Block, District North Baster, got washed away and also get damaged due to filing of water. The appellant informed the Insurance Company about the incident on 12.06.2008. The Insurance Company appointed a surveyor who assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.7,50,588/- but observed that no peril of the policy was attracted. The claim was repudiated on the basis of the surveyor report. The complainant then filed consumer complaint before the State Commission on 06.03.2009 for the claim of Rs.27,36,000/- with interest @12% pa. and also compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards other head and cost of proceedings. The opposite party insurance company while resisting the complaint admitted to have received premium and issuance of the policy. Opposite party /Insurance Company averred that the questioned policy covered risk of Bidi leaves’ stock while kept in open, bundles or in loose stored under shed or open and did not cover risk of Tendu leaves as claimed by the complainant. Insurance Company averred that the fact of heavy rains with storm and typhoon in Koylibeda area continuously for three days, was not certified by Meteorological Department. Opposite party Insurance Company stated to have appointed a surveyor Sudhir Joshi to inspect the site and to assess the loss who accordingly inspected the site, took photographs and submitted his report and assessed loss of Rs.7,50,588/- but he observed that said loss was due to ordinary rains, since Tendu leaves got wet and it was not due to storm-typhoon so did not come within the ambit of insured peril. Opposite party Insurance Company mentioned that on the basis of surveyor’s report, it repudiated the claim of the complainant after thorough study and therefore it did not commit any deficiency in service so the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The complaint filed by the appellant/complainant has been dismissed vide order dated 31.07.2010 of the State Commission.

3. Hence the present appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant/complainant stated that due to heavy rains there was inundation in the area and some of the Tendu leaves were fled away in the water and some of the bundles of Tendu leaves got damaged as they remained wet under water for more time and could not be dried up. The Insurance was valid for the Tendu leaves kept in the open as well as under the shed or in the godown. The surveyor report clearly establishes the fact that Tendu leaves got damaged and that is why the surveyor has assessed the loss, though, surveyor has not correc