1. In this case, the respondent/complainant, M/s Mathura Dass Medical Store had insured stock-in-trade with the petitioner, New India Insurance company to the extent of Rs.7 lakhs. During the subsistence of complainant policy, on the night intervening 29th/30th March, 2010, a fire broke out in the building. The surveyor was deputed and he came to the conclusion that respondent/complainant was entitled to payment of Rs.3,74,820/-. The respondent had made claim in the sum of Rs.7 lakhs. Both the fora granted a sum of about Rs.7 lakh minus the amount already paid. The State Commission passed the order with a wee bit modification. It relevant portion runs as follows ; 7. Consequently, we partly allow the appeal and order by way of modification of the order of the learned District Forum that instead of an amount of Rs.3,98,028/-, a sum of Rs.3,88,126/- shall be payable by the appellant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the complaint till the date of payment of aforesaid amount of money and nothing shall be payable, on account of compensation, but an amount of Rs.5,000/- shall be paid, on account of litigation expenses, instead of Rs.10,000/-. 2. The case of the opposite party, insurance company, is that the complainant himself wrote a letter i.e. consent/discharge voucher, wherein he claimed a sum of Rs.3,74,820/-. The said amount was given in full and final settlement of the claim. Both the fora have come to the conclusion that the discharge voucher was written under compulsion. They have also tried to prove that the discharge order was written on a blank paper on the letter pad of the petitioner/opposite party. Both the fora came to the conclusion that the said letter was forged one. 3. We see no flaw in their findings because it otherwise stands proved that the stock in the shop was much more than Rs.3,74,820/-. It must be kept in mind that the complainant furnished a statement to Punjab National Bank that his stock-in-trade at that time was worth Rs.6,53,000/-. It is difficult to fathom as to how the complainant gave a statement which goes to his detriment. That statement of account will come under the inspection and scrutiny of Income Tax and other authorities. The statement of surveyor is not supported by any cogent evidence. It was the duty of the surveyor to check the statement of accounts given to Punjab National Bank. Counsel for petitioner also invited our attention that the surveyor has deducted 25% on account of approximation. District Forum observed that the opposite party has failed to show any terms and condition in the policy qua deduction of 25% on account of approximation. District Forum came to the conclusion that the report of surveyor is not credit worthy. The report of the surveyor should have mentioned the documents like bills, voucher, challan, invoice etc. Those should have compared and tallied with the statement of accounts submitted before the Punjab National Bank. Consequently, we place no reliance on his report. Order passed by the State Commission does not suffer from any infirmity and illegality and hence, revision petition is dismissed. 4. No order as to costs.