ORDER : S.H. Kapadia, J. - M/s Parekh Automobiles had challenged the levy of octroi duty on goods which entered Municipal Council and which stood re-exported. In the writ petition it was the case of M/s Parekh Automobiles that octroi duty was not leviable as the goods were neither used nor consumed in the municipal limits. As stated above the goods were in fact re-exported. This contention was accepted by the High Court which took the view that octroi duty was not leviable as the goods were re-exported. It appears that during the pendency of the writ petition M/s Parekh Automobiles was required to deposit the octroi duty. M/s Parekh Automobiles was the commission agent of Indian Oil Corporation. Indian Oil Corporation owed certain amount as commission to M/s Parekh Automobiles. Therefore, pending the hearing and final disposal of the writ petition the High Court directed Indian Oil Corporation to deposit the octroi duty amounting to Rs 8.17 lakhs (approximately) on behalf of M/s Parekh Automobiles in Court. As stated above, ultimately M/s Parekh Automobiles succeeded in their challenge. After disposal of the matter the State has amended the law and that amended law is also challenged. That challenge is pending before this Court in subsequent matters with which we are not concerned for the time being. 2. It is the case of Indian Oil Corporation that M/s Parekh Automobiles has recovered the duty from their customers and therefore Indian Oil Corporation should not be directed to refund the amount to M/s Parekh Automobiles as it would result in unjust enrichment. In our view such an argument is untenable. 3. M/s Parekh Automobiles had challenged the levy of octroi. Pending the petition Indian Oil Corporation deposited the amount on behalf of M/s Parekh Automobiles. That amount was as "deposit" pending disposal of the writ petition. It was the case of pure deposit made by Indian Oil Corporation on behalf of M/s Parekh Automobiles. Since the petition was allowed and M/s Parekh Automobiles has succeeded in showing that the levy of octroi was not correct M/s Parekh Automobiles became entitled to the refund of deposit from Indian Oil Corporation. It is not open to Indian Oil Corporation to invoke the doctrine of unjust enrichment and refuse payment to M/s Parekh Automobiles. That doctrine can be invoked by the Corporation and that too in the context of recovery of octroi duty. It is not open to Indian Oil Corporation to invoke the doctrine of unjust enrichment and refuse payment to M/s Parekh Automobiles. That doctrine can be invoked by the Corporation and that too in the context of recovery of octroi duty. In the hands of Indian Oil Corporation the account (sic amount) was a "deposit" and not octroi duty. 4. In the circumstances we direct Indian Oil Corporation to refund Rs 8.17 lakhs with interest accrued thereon, if any, within 12 weeks. We make it clear that the said sum of Rs 8.17 lakhs was invested in fixed deposit. It was interest-bearing account. Therefore M/s Parekh Automobiles would be entitled to the said sum of Rs 8.17 lakhs with interest accumulated thereon. Subject to above, the civil appeal shall stand disposed of. 5. We also direct Indian Oil Corporation to pay costs of Rs 10,000 to M/s Parekh Automobiles.