Request for adjournment of one week is refused. 

Heard counsel for the petitioner.  The case in question is completely covered by the judgment of this Commission LIC of India & Ors. Vs. Roshan Lal Gupta, II (2007) CPJ 194 (NC) which has been relied upon by the State Commission.  Counsel for the petitioner states that the facts and circumstances are different since in the present case, the person had died due to accident but in the case of LIC of India Vs. Roshan Lal Gupta (supra), the death of a person was natural and the age of the applicant was suppressed.  We do not find that this makes any difference whatsoever.   In view of this, we do not find that any case has been made out for interference in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction  under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The revision is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs.