It transpired during the course of hearing that in order to justify the repudiation of the claim, the insurer relied upon a report given by one Dr. Praveen Kumar Mehrotra. The aforesaid doctor, however, was not produced as a witness nor was his affidavit filed by the insurer. It would be necessary to either examine the aforesaid doctor as a witness or to take his affidavit by way of evidence with liberty to the complainant to cross-examine in order to decide whether the horse of the complainant had died  on account of one of the excepted diseases or not. The impugned orders are, therefore, set aside and the matter is remanded back to the concerned District Forum to decide the complaint afresh after giving an opportunity to the insurer either to produce the   Dr. Praveen Kumar Mehrotra as a witness or to file his affidavit by way of evidence. The complainant would have an opportunity to cross-examine the aforesaid doctor. He will also be entitled to examine the veterinary doctor in order to prove that the death of the horse had occurred on account of reasons other than one of the excepted diseases. If a veterinary doctor is produced, the insurer will be entitled to cross-examine the doctor. The parties are directed to appear before the concerned District Forum on 20.3.2017. The said Forum shall decide the complaint afresh in the light of this order within three months of the parties appearing before it. Both the revision petitions stand disposed of.