Delay of 8 days is condoned.

          Petitioner insurance company was opposite party before the District Forum.

          Briefly stated, the facts are that the complainants/respondents insured their vehicle with the petitioner insurance company for a period from 04.10.2000 to 03.10.2001 in the sum of Rs.4 Lac.  Their driver Balwinder Singh @ Babu had taken the vehicle but did not

-2-

return the same.  Later on, they came to know that the driver was murdered by anti-social elements and they had also stolen the vehicle.  A police case was registered but the vehicle remained ‘Untraced’.  Complainants submitted their claim with the insurance company which was repudiated on the ground that the complainants were using the vehicle as ‘TAXI’.   Aggrieved by this, the complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum.

          District Forum vide its order dated 10.1.2003 allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay sum of Rs.3,60,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a.  10% was deducted on account of depreciation.  It was held that the petitioner had failed to prove that the vehicle was being used as a ‘TAXI’.

          Being aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission.  The State Commission has upheld the order of the District Forum except that it has reduced the rate of interest from 12% to 7.5%.  The State Commission has also observed in its order that the petitioner has failed to place any evidence on record to show that

-3-

the vehicle was being used as a ‘TAXI’ except the report of its own Investigator.

            We agree with the view taken by the foras below.  The finding recorded by them is a finding of fact.  Except for the report of the Investigator, no evidence has been led by the petitioner to prove that the vehicle was being used as a ‘TAXI’.  Even no affidavit of the Investigator has been filed in support of report given by him.  Revision petition is dismissed.