the delayed payment of Rs.26,40,000/- is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents had made a claim for minimum 300 km for transportation which was contrary to the terms of the contract. In any event, the respondents had submitted an undertaking to the petitioners on 30th March, 2010 before releasing a sum of Rs.12,05,000/- to the effect that the respondents would not make any claim for interest or any other claim. It is submitted by the learned counsel that it was not the case of the respondents that the said undertaking was submitted by the respondents under duress or coercion and was submitted voluntarily. He submits that the letter dated 15th April, 2010 of the respondents after receiving the said payment of Rs.12,05,600/- was by way of an after thought and no further claims could have been made by the respondents contrary to such undertaking. He submits that in any event in view of clauses 19(a) and 19(b) of the contract, no interest was liable to be paid by the petitioners for the time taken for procedural work. He submits that under the said provisions, the delay if any, in payment on account of audit observations/objections also was liable to be excluded and no interest was payable during the said period. He submits that the award of interest is contrary to clauses 19(a) and 19(b) of the contract and is in conflict with public policy.
