(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the State Commission Maharashtra dated 09.04.2015 whereby the State Commission dismissed the appeal No. 141 of 2015 filed by the petitioner complainant.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts relevant for the disposal of the revision petition are that petitioner got his Eicher Tempo insured with respondent insurance company. During the subsistence of the insurance policy on 15.05.2010, vehicle met with an accident resulting in damage. Intimation was given to the insurance company. However, insurance claim of the petitioner was repudiated on the ground that vehicle was not having a fitness certificate on the date of accident. This resulted in filing of consumer complaint.
(3.) District Forum on consideration of the pleadings and the evidence, taking note of the fact that on the date of accident, the vehicle was not having fitness certificate, dismissed the complaint. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the State Commission while concurring with the order of the District Forum, dismissed the appeal.