K GOPINATH Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the submissions of Sri.V.V.Surendran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.N.Radhakrishnan, counsel for the first respondent. I have considered the grounds raised and the documents placed on record. Though it is true that a detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, I do not find any good reason as to why relief should not be granted. Pursuant to Exhibit P1, Exhibit P2 detailed agreement was executed. The amounts claimed in Exhibit P3 was not paid by the District Panchayat. The District Panchayat may be having its own reasons for the inability to make payment such as non obtaining of funds from the Kerala State Urban Development Corporation. But those are all problems of the first respondent and not that of the petitioner.

(2.) UNDER these circumstances, I hold that the balance amount of Rs.3,18,400/- which is due to the petitioner under Exhibit P3 has to be paid by the respondents. The ultimate submission of Sri.N.Radhakrishnan was that amounts will be paid as and when funds are available. I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to pay the amounts claimed under Exhibit P3 to the petitioner at their earliest and at any rate within a maximum period of five months from the date of petitioner producing a copy of this judgment. In the event of further delay, the amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum.