K.P.PETER Vs. TRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is stated to be a supplier of electric items and he says that based on a tender notification of the year 2015, a copy of which is record on Ext.P1, he had supplied tube lights and allied fittings to the 1st respondent Municipality. His grievance in this writ petition is that even though he has successfully completed the supply of the articles, the Municipality has not paid him his entire bill. He therefore, prays that the 1st respondent be directed to honour his bills.

(2.) The stand of the Municipality in justification of their refusal to honour the full bill of the petitioner is that several tube lights and light fittings had become defective and that the petitioner is obligated to replace the same. According to them until the petitioner does so, they would not be legally liable to honour the bills. The Municipality also says that as regards the undisputed amounts in the bill, with respect to the non defective articles, the petitioner has already been paid.

(3.) Noticing the dialectical contentions of the parties, I had, by an order dated 12.09.2018, asked the petitioner to have a meeting with Secretary of the Municipality, so that the disputes can be amicably resolved; but I am told today told that the said meeting has not yielded any results. I therefore, proceed to dispose of this writ petition on its merits.