We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. This petition is directed against the judgment rendered by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh on 16.11.2010 in Appeal No.A-467/2010. By the impugned order by re-appreciating the evidence led before the District Forum, the State Commission came to the conclusion that the deceased was not proved to be guilty of concealing any material fact. There is no dispute about the fact that deceased Rajendra Kumar Patel had taken insurance policy from the petitioner for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on his life. The policy was issued on 28.3.2008 and necessary premium was paid by him. Said Rajendra Kumar Patel was admitted in Dhamtari Christian Hospital, Dhamtari and died on 1.1.2008. Being nominee in the policy, the complainant preferred a claim, which was repudiated by the petitioner, insurance company account of suppression of the material fact that the deceased was suffering from liver problem due to excessive consumption of liquor. The District Forum rejected the complaint of the respondent (complainant) holding that there was suppression of material facts. The State Commission, however, came to the conclusion that the insurance form was filled up by the agent of the petitioner and the entire proposal form was in English, which was not shown to have been understood by the assured. The State Commission further held that as regards the column in respect of consumption of alcohol, it was kept blank, but it could not be interpreted as suppression of the material fact. Secondly, the statement of the complainant was also not recorded by the investigator in persona because purportedly a girl from neighbourhood was called and recorded the statement. The report itself shows that the nominee is illiterate lady and was unable to read and write. It is difficult to give significance to such a statement when the writing of such statement may not be attributed to her and could not be verified from any other record. The State Commission has observed that when the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 1.10.2008, Dr.S.K. Chatterjee recorded the history as per the narration of some of the relatives of the deceased, but name of any such relative has not been mentioned in the medical record. Obviously, the medical history was given on the basis of hearsay information. Some of the relatives have stated the history of the deceased that the deceased was consuming alcohol for the last about two years to the extent of half a bottle per day. The death certificate shows that the deceased was suffering from liver disease, which was Hepatitis and Hepatic Encelopathy. In any case, when the form was not filled by the deceased himself and it was the agent of the petitioner who filled the form in English and that the deceased was not conversant with the English language, would go to show that there was no intention of suppression of any material fact as such. All the said and done, the appreciation of the circumstances and the evidence by the first Appellate Court is based on available material and adequate reasons have been recorded to reach at the conclusion that there was no suppression of any material fact on the part of the deceased assured. In the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, re-appreciation of evidence is impermissible when there appears no perversity in the findings of the State Commission. In this view of the matter, the petition is dismissed. No costs.