ULLAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed by Oriental insurance Co. Ltd. to challenge the order dated 10. 4. 97 in Case No. WC. CR. 26 of 1995 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Bangalore division No. 3, Bangalore, insofar as the same related to the fastening of the liability with regard to payment of interest on the award amount. ( 2 ) THE appellant insurance company is represented by the learned counsel Mr. S. P. Shankar. On the other side, the contesting respondent No. 1 is represented by mr. C. M. Desai. The respondent No. 3, the owner of the vehicle is represented by Mr. C. M. Monappa. The respondent No. 2, the indian Oil Corporation having been served with the notice had remained absent before court. ( 3 ) MR. Shankar, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant insurance company had taken me through the impugned order insofar as the same related to the payment of the interest on the award amount. The said pan is discussed in para (16) of the impugned order. That discussion, as I see is on the issue No. 6 framed by the workmen's Compensation Commissioner, bangalore Division No. 3, Bangalore henceforth in brief referred to as 'the wcc'. The ground urged in the instant appeal is also on the point of avoidance of the liability of the appellant insurance company with regard to payment of interest on the award amount. With reference to the copy of the policy in question, Mr. Shankar submitted that there was a specific agreement between the insured and the insurer, i. e. , the respondent No. 3 on the one side and the appellant insurance company on the other that the insurer will not be having liability with regard to the indemnification of the payment of interest and penalty on the insurer. To cull out the said part of the term of the agreement between the appellant insurance company and the respondent No. 3, the same reads as hereunder:"it is hereby understood and agreed that the cover provided under the policy shall not extend to indemnify the insured/ insureds in respect of any interest and/ or penalty, which may be imposed on him/them on account of his/their failure to comply with the requirements laid down under the Workmen's Compensation act, 1923 and subsequent amendments of the said Act. " ( 4 ) IN this context, I feel it appropriate to quote para (16) of the impugned order. To do that, the same reads as hereunder: (Omitted as in vernacular) ( 5 ) ON a simple reading of the above, it appears to me that the WCC had fastened the liability with regard to payment of interest at 6 per cent on the award amount for the reason that the appellant insurance company did not comply with the request of the respondent No, 3 with regard to deposit of the same since liable under the workmen's Compensation Act, despite there being a clear communication emanated from the respondent No. 3, owner. Therefore, it appears to me that the term as set out above in the insurance policy has got no play in the matter of compliance of the deposit by the appellant insurance company. Within 30 days from the date of occurrence of the incident in question, needless to say that the appellant insurance company on its own, on receiving of the communication from the respondent No. 3, owner, would have deposited the sum in question well in time as required under the Workmen's Compensation Act. ( 6 ) IN that view of the matter, I feel that the instant appeal does not merit any consideration. In this context, it is apt to observe here that the appellant insurance company despite knowing its statutory position recoursed to the instant appeal before this court to challenge the impugned order insofar as the same related to the interest part. According to me, the respondents herein were made to come before this court for no good reason, for, it had to pay the interest as it had not deposited the sum within 30 days of occurrence of the accident. ( 7 ) THEREFORE, it appears to me that the contesting respondent No. 1 who chose to appear before this court by engaging the services of the counsel has to be compensated with the costs by the appellant insurance company. That costs, I fairly assess at Rs. 3,000. ( 8 ) LET the insurance company pay the said sum to the respondent No. 1 within a period of 2 months from the date of this order. That costs, I fairly assess at Rs. 3,000. ( 8 ) LET the insurance company pay the said sum to the respondent No. 1 within a period of 2 months from the date of this order. It is also added that, in the event the direction herein made with regard to payment of costs is not met, respondent No. 1 is at liberty to recourse to law to recover the said costs imposed in the instant appeal. ( 9 ) FROM the side of respondent No. 1, mr. Desai submitted that even if there were to be any contract between the parties, the said contract is of no consequence, insofar as the statutory liability is concerned. ( 10 ) THE appeal, therefore, stands dismissed with the above costs as against the appellant insurance company. Appeal dismissed. --- *** --- .