Statutory interest does not bar costs where refund was delayed and court action was needed to secure compliance.

Once the refund voucher was issued during the pendency of the petition, the substantive refund grievance was treated as satisfied and that relief became infructuous. The remaining issue was costs. The Court held that statutory interest compensates for delay in refund, but it does not cover the expense of approaching the Court to secure performance of an undisputed statutory duty. Accordingly, payment of refund with interest did not bar an award of costs, and costs were granted to the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to costs after the refund voucher was issued during the pendency of the petition and whether payment of statutory interest displaced such entitlement.

Analysis: The main grievance stood satisfied once the refund voucher was issued, so the petition was disposed of so far as the substantive refund relief was concerned. The remaining question was costs. The Court held that statutory interest compensates for delay in refund, but it does not compensate for the expense of approaching the Court when the statutory duty to issue the refund had not been performed promptly.

Conclusion: Costs were awarded to the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 5,000, and the fact that refund with interest had been made did not bar an award of costs.

---