Interest on delayed labour dues may be awarded under Section 33-C(2) despite retirement, delay, or res judicata objections.

A claim under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act for interest on an adjudicated amount remained maintainable despite delayed filing, because the underlying right accrued during employment and the delay stemmed from the employer's continued non-compliance. Cessation of the employment relationship did not defeat the claim, no further evidence was required on admitted facts, and res judicata did not apply since the earlier proceedings had not claimed interest. The Labour Court was held competent to award interest on delayed payment under the Interest Act, 1978 and, additionally, in exercise of equitable jurisdiction under Article 226. Future interest could be pursued separately.

---

---

Issues: Whether a Labour Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 can award interest on an amount adjudicated earlier but paid after substantial delay, and whether such claim is defeated by delay, cessation of the employer-employee relationship, want of evidence, or res judicata.

Analysis: The application for interest was filed shortly after the principal amount was eventually paid, and the prolonged non-payment flowed from the respondent's own persistent refusal to comply with the earlier order. A claim under Section 33-C(2) was held to remain maintainable even after retirement or cessation of employment where the claim relates to a right that accrued during the subsistence of the employment relationship. The admitted facts required no further evidence. The earlier claim did not include interest, so the later claim was not barred by res judicata. On the substantive question, the Labour Court was held competent to award interest in such a case under Section 3(1)(a) and Section 3(1)(b) of the Interest Act, 1978, Section 4 of that Act, and also in exercise of equitable powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Interest was treated as recoverable on the delayed payment of an adjudicated monetary entitlement, and future interest could be sought by a separate proceeding.

Conclusion: The claim for interest was maintainable and the Labour Court had power to grant it. The objections based on delay, cessation of employment, absence of evidence, and res judicata failed, and relief was held to be in favour of the petitioner.

---