G. Narendar, J.

The appellants are the Executive Engineer and the Accounts Officer of the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited. The appellants are before this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and decree rendered by the Court of the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) at Chitradurga in O.S.No.35/2002, dated 14.8.2003.

2. The parties are referred to by the nomenclature before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The appellants and the respondent herein are the defendants and the plaintiff respectively.

4. The facts in brief are as follows :-

It is the case of the plaintiff that he is an authorised P.W.D Contractor and that the defendants had invited tenders for construction of the extension of Sub-Divisional office buildings at Holalkere and the plaintiff was declared as the successful bidder and upon confirmation of the bid, approval was accorded by the Chief Engineer (Electrical), Hubli Zone, Hubli; That the plaintiff commenced and completed construction within the allotted time. Upon such completion, the defendants inspected the building and prepared the statement of bill of accounts and upon such preparation of statement of bill of accounts, the then Chief Engineer, Hubli, issued directions to defendants to release the bill amount for the completed work and that the bill of accounts were finalized on 30.11.1998; that on account of finalization of the bill, the plaintiff made several requests for release of amount due under the bill. But the defendants kept postponing the matter on one ground or the other and that on 16.6.1999, the plaintiff submitted a written requisition requesting for settlement of the bill amount but no satisfactory action was taken; that the plaintiff has clearly stated that if the bill amount is not settled, the defendants would be liable to pay the same along with interest at the rate of 2% for Rs.100/- and despite such a claim, no reply was elicited from the defendants; that left with no other alternative efficacious remedy, the plaintiff approached the High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.490/2000. During the pendency of the writ petition, defendants filed memo dated 3.3.2000 stating that the bill amount would be settled. It was contended by the plaintiff that even before the High Court in the writ petition, it was prayed that the defendants are liable to pay interest at the rate of 24% on the bill amount for the period of delay i.e. from the date of confirmation by the internal audit upto the date of payment of the amount. But the High Court did not order payment of interest, on the other hand it permitted the plaintiff to approach the Competent Court of law for appropriate relief; that thereafter the defendants issued the cheque for the bill amount on 4.4.2000 but the said amount was accepted under protest and by reserving the right of the plaintiff to recover damages for the delayed period of 17 months; that the defendants while paying the bill amount had orally assured the plaintiff of paying interest for the delay period of 17 months and when this did not fructify into action, the plaintiff got issued the legal notice dated 7.1.2002. Despite the service of notice the defendants did not respond and the suit for recovery of accrued interest for the delayed period of payment came to be filed. On the above pleadings, the plaintiff had sought for judgment and decree and reliefs against the defendants as follows :-

(a) The plaintiff prays for recovery of amount of withheld bill interest amount for Rs. 5,44,418/- at the rate of 24% p.a. from 30.11.98 to 4.4.2000 which is about 17 months delay i.e. Rs. 1,83,842/- as by way of damages;

(b) To pass judgment and decree as damages for Rs. 2,43,842/- as damages and directed to be paid by defendants with suit pendency interest at the rate of 24% p.a.;

(c) Towards general damages, mental agony, hardship, inconvenience, injury caused to plaintiff for Rs. 50,000/-;

(d) High Court costs towards legal expenses of Rs.10,000/-;

(e) to award co