Aggrieved by the concurrent findings recorded by the Fora below, the Insurance Company has approached this Commission in order to invoke the supervisory jurisdiction of this Commission under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. We have heard Mr. Sameer Nandwani, counsel for the petitioner. He seeks to challenge the orders passed by the Fora below primarily on the ground that both the fora below erred in awarding Rs.1,16,932.46ps. towards insurance claim as against Rs.52,501/-, the net loss assessed by the surveyor. The Fora below have taken pains in examining the matter in great details and by reasoned orders held that the net loss as assessed by the surveyor could not be justified in the facts and circumstances of the case more particularly, when the clause on the strength of which the insured was sought to be deprived of almost 50% of his insurance claim were not communicated to the complainant alongwith terms and conditions of the policy. The view taken by the Fora below in consonance with the view taken by the Supreme Court in the case of /s. Modern Insulators Ltd. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.I (2000) CPJ 1 (SC). Moreover in the recent case rs. Rubi (Chandra) Dutta Vs. M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. [II (2010) CPJ 19 (SC)], Supreme Court has reiterated the legal position that National Commission should exercise its supervisory jurisdiction / revisional power only in exceptional cases where there is either jurisdictional error or the orders passed by Fora below have resulted into miscarriage of justice. In the present case we do not think that any of the two circumstances exist which would justify the interference of this Commission in its supervisory jurisdiction. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed as devoid of any merits.