1 The Dungarpur Kendriya Sahakari Bank,Dungarpur vs. Basant Lal & Anr. (D.B.Civil Special Appeal (W)No.835/07) Date of Order:- 23.09.2008. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Dr.P.S.Bhati, for the appellant. Mr.Kamal Dave ), Mr.M.C.Bishnoi ) for the respondents Heard counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against order dated 4th July, 07 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in his writ jurisdiction whereby and whereunder, the writ application was dismissed affirming the order passed by the Labour Court in exercise of its powers u/s 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This matter was heard on 17th March, 08. On that day learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he has already deposited a sum of Rs.4,33,026/- in compliance of the order passed by the Labour Court u/s 33-C(2) of the Act. On deposit of the amount aforesaid, this appeal remained pending to consider as to whether the appellant was liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum from 1.2.97 and a cost of Rs.20,000/- awarded by the writ court. It is undisputed that the principal amount to the tune of 2 Rs.4,33,026/- has already been deposited before the Commissioner, Department of Labour and Social Welfare, State of Rajasthan. The same is disbursable to the concerned workman. We have carefully examined the order passed by the Labour Court and also by the learned Single Judge of this Court. In an execution proceeding, as envisaged u/s 33-C(2) of the Act, the learned Labour Court could not have gone beyond the admitted claim of the parties as the proceeding was not adjudicatory one and more so, no specific reasons have been assigned for payment of interest, even noticing the fact that the concerned workman had already superannuated w.e.f. 1.2.97. The Labour Court in the background of the case, therefore, appears to be not justified in this particular case, in awarding interest @ 9% per annum from the date of superannuation of the concerned workman. The learned Single Judge of this Court however, affirmed the order of the Labour Court and awarded a cost of Rs.20,000/-, payable by the appellant to the concerned workman. Passing of an order for payment of interest coupled with the order of cost, in our view, would be exorbitant in the given facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view, the factum of deposit of the principal amount with the Labour Department. In our view, therefore, the ends of justice will be 3 met if the cost amount is paid by the appellant to the concerned workman. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, that part of the orders, whereby a direction was issued for payment of interest @ 9% per annum are set aside. So far payment of cost is concerned, that would be payable by the appellant to the concerned workman. With this modification in the orders impugned, this appeal is disposed of. (SANGEET LODHA),J. (NARAYAN ROY) CJ. Aditya/-