ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Re. Interlocutory Application No. 6374 of 2011. The delay of 105 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. 2. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1302 of 2011 and Interlocutory Application No. 6375 of 2011. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 23rd March 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 2858 of 2004, the respondent Bihar State Housing Board has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. 4. Under the impugned order, the learned single Judge has, in accordance with Regulation 45 of the Bihar State Housing Board (Management And Disposal of Housing Estates) Regulation, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as “the Regulation”), directed the appellant to refund the amount of earnest money paid by the writ petitioner with interest at the rate of 5% per annum commencing from 24th May 1983 till the date of payment. 5. Learned counsel Mr. R.S. Pradhan has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that the direction issued by the learned single Judge is contrary to Regulation 45 of the Regulation. He has submitted that under the said Regulation, the amount of earnest money deposited after the date of the Regulation will carry interest as provided under Regulation 45. The said Regulation 45 specifically provides that such interest would not be payable on the amount of earnest money paid before the date of the Regulation. 6. We are of the opinion that the award of interest is within the discretion of the Court. If any amount is wrongfully detained by the appellant, the Court has discretion to order refund of such amount with interest. In absence of any law governing the payment of interest, the Court would have discretion to order for payment of interest at a suitable rate. In the present case, Regulation 45 which provides, “No interest will be payable on deposits made hereinbefore” would mean that no interest under Regulation 45 would be payable on the amount of earnest money deposited prior to the date of the Regulation, i.e. 24th May 1983. Nevertheless, the said provision does not take away the discretion of the Court to award interest, if justified. 7. For the aforesaid reason, we do not find any merit in this Appeal. 8. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. 9. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.