IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8776 of 2006(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.RAVINDRA NATH, S/O.LATE P.BALAKRISHNA MENON, AGED 55 YEARS, 47/721-C, J.M.VILLAS, SWAGATHAM ROAD, VADUTHALA, KOCHI-682023. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI-11. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, CHERANALLOOR. BY SHRI.TEKCHAND, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.8776/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.V/114809/1989 DATED 15/02/1991 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. P2 : COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED TO ATTEND ENQUIRY ON 29/12/1994. P3 : COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29/09/1994 OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA. P4 : COPY OF THE RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING THE DELIVERY OF ONE BOAT ON 11/01/1995. P5 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/03/1998 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ON BEHALF OF the FIRM. P6 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 07/02/2005 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. P7 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21/03/2006 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 8776 of 2006 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 19th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of value of one boat with interest thereon totaling Rs.3,65,838/- on account of petitioner's failure to supply the boat to Government. Even according to petitioner, petitioner received full payment for supply of six boats but supplied only five boats. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner vide Ext.P5 offered to supply the boat, but the Government did not take delivery. I am unable to accept this contention because delivery, in terms of purchase order and the payments received, should have been made by petitioner to Government before June 1991 and Ext.P5 is seen issued only on 12/03/1998. Even though learned counsel has relied on Exts.P3 & P4, there is nothing to indicate that the last boat, which was not delivered by petitioner, was available for delivery and petitioner obviously has not taken any steps to deliver the same. In the circumstances, the amount collected by petitioner is recoverable as the boat is not supplied by petitioner. WP(C) No.8776/2006 -2- However, since there are lapses on the part of respondents, I reduce the interest to 6%, provided the value of the boat with 6% interest is remitted by petitioner on or before 15/11/2008. If payment is not made by then, waiver of interest granted as above will stand vacated and respondents will proceed for recovery of entire arrears. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg