IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1267 of 2011(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SRI.K.P.PETER, NATIONAL MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING CO. TOMS BUILDINGS, XII/323, P.P.ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542. BY ADV. SRI.ASP.KURUP SRI.SADCHITH.P.KURUP RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGALAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------------- WP(C) No.1267 of 2011 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner who is the proprietor of National Manufacturing & Engineering Co. engaged in the manufacture, sales and supply of electrical goods filed this writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to make payment of `.3,48,637/-, the amount remaining unpaid towards the cost of the goods supplied by the petitioner. The total amount payable by the first respondent Municipality to the petitioner arising out of the aforesaid transaction was only `.17,47,000/-. Admittedly, out of the said amount an amount of `.16,00,000/- has already been paid. This is obvious from Exhibit P6 itself and therefore, the balance amount payable to the petitioner is only `.1,47,000/-. According to the petitioner he is also entitled to get interest for the delayed payment. It is based on such calculation that the petitioner seeks issuance of a direction to the respondents to make payment of `.3,48,637/-. I have heard the learned counsel WP(C) No.1267 of 2011 2 on both sides. It is obvious from the rival contentions that an amount of `.1,47,000/- is still remaining unpaid. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the said amount would be disbursed to the petitioner within one month. This is recorded. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to disburse the admitted balance amount of `.1,47,000/- due to the petitioner towards the price of the electrical goods purchased by the respondent, expeditiously, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of this judgment. In view of lack of proper pleadings, I do not think that the question with respect to the entitlement of the petitioner to claim interest for the delayed payment could be decided in this writ petition and therefore the said question with respect to the entitlement of the petitioner to claim interest for the delay in payment from the respondent is left open. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. rkc