Delay of 28 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

          Petitioner/complainant got his 6 buffalos insured from the petitioner between the period 16.9.2001 to 15.9.2003.  One of the buffalos was alleged to have died on 16.8.2002.   The claim lodged by the petitioner was repudiated by the insurance company on the ground that as per the post mortem report, there was no tag in the year of the said buffalo.  Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed a complaint before the District Forum.

-2-

          District Forum dismissed the complaint, aggrieved against which the petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission.

          The State Commission, relying upon a judgment of Uttranchal State Commission, held that the petitioner was not entitled to the insured amount for the buffalo because at the time of post mortem of the dead buffalo conducted by the Veterinary Surgeon, there was no year tag.  As per the terms of the insurance, the tags are put in the buffalos, which are insured, to identify them.  Since in this case, the petitioner had failed to establish that the buffalo was the one which had been insured, the petitioner was not entitled to the claim put forth by him.

          We have gone through the post mortem report, order of the District Forum as well as the order of the State Commission.  We agree with the finding of fact recorded by the fora below that the petitioner had failed to establish that the dead buffalo was the one

-3-

which had been insured with the insurance company.  Dismissed.  No costs.