Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Qdc India Consulting P Limited vs Channabasava S on 1 September, 2025

KABC020118372024




      IN THE COURT OF THE SMALL CAUSES AT
                  BENGALURU

             PRESENT: Smt.Gayathri S Kate,
                                    B.Com., LL.B.,
                      XVIII ADDL., JUDGE & ACJM,
                      Court of Small Causes,
                      BENGALURU.

         Dated this the 1st day of September, 2025
                    S.C.No.193/2024

PLAINTIFF:         QDC INDIA CONSULTING (P) LTD.,
                   MEP Consultants
                   A Company Incorporated
                   under the provisions of the Indian
                   Companies Act, 1956 and
                   having its registered office at No.377/61
                   2nd Floor, 19th Main Road, 1st Block,
                   Rajajinagar, Bengaluru-560 010

                   Represented by its Managing Director
                   Sri Varadharaj G.V.,

                         (By Sri.U.R., Adv)

                   V/s

DEFENDANT:         Sri.Channabasava S.,
                   S/o. Nagarajan
                   Aged major,
                   Mylapura (V), Balakundi (P)
                   Siraguppa (TQ) 583122
 SCCH-4                             2                      SC No.193/2024

                        Ballari District.

                              (By Sri. H.C.H., Adv)


Date of institution of the suit:               07.03.2024

Nature of suit:                                Money recovery

Date of commencement of
recording of evidence:                         24.01.2025

Date of pronouncement of judgment:             01.09.2025

Duration:                            Year/s    Month/s Day/s
                                        01      05      24
                                *******

                        : J U D G M E NT :

     The    plaintiff   has   instituted    this   suit    against   the

defendant seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along

with interest at a rate of 9% p.a., from the date of petition till

the date of realization.

     2. The plaint averments in brief is as under:

     The defendant claiming to be a permanent resident of the

address mentioned in the cause title approached the plaintiff

during the year 2021 and submitted an application seeking

suitable employment in terms of an application dated

05.07.2021. On a perusal of your academic qualifications,
 SCCH-4                          3                     SC No.193/2024

offered employment for the post of " Trainee BIM Engineer-

Mechanical" with effect from July 7, 2021 was executed

between Plaintiff and defendant.

     Considering    their   application   and   the      documents

submitted by the defendant, the defendant did not possess the

required expertise to discharge his duties as a Trainee BIM

Engineer-Mechanical     and   required    training.     Accordingly,

Plaintiff offered to impart training to defendant for a period of

six months. The defendant had agreed to serve plaintiff for a

period of two years from the date of appointment as a Trainee

BIM Engineer-Mechanical to enable his client to recoup the

investments made by his client in imparting training to

defendant. However, for reasons best known to defendant,

defendant has chosen to abstain from their duties as a Trainee

BIM Engineer-Mechanical with effect from January 31, 2023,

without intimation. Upon completion of the Training period,

the employment of the defendant was confirmed in terms of

the confirmation letter dated July 1, 2022. However, all the

other terms and conditions as stipulated in the employee
 SCCH-4                           4                  SC No.193/2024

Service Agreement remained operative as on the date of

confirmation of the employment.

     The defendant is well aware that the terms of the

Agreement requires the defendant to serve the plaintiff

company for a period of two years which presupposes that the

defendant was not entitled to abstain from attending to his

duties before completion of two years from the date of

employment, as a consequence of which defendant has

committed breach of terms of the Agreement as a consequence

of which the defendant would become liable to pay a sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the plaintiff company on

account of breach of the terms of employment. The defendant

has further agreed to pay the said sum upon a Demand Letter

issued by the plaintiff, under the said Agreement.

     The defendant failed to intimate about his inability to

discharge   his   duties   and   abstained   from    duties   after

completion of the training period. The plaintiff has spent a

substantial amount on training the defendant but all the

efforts put forth by the plaintiff have not yielded any result. On

the contrary, the plaintiff has suffered a loss by investing in
 SCCH-4                            5                    SC No.193/2024

imparting training to the defendant. Therefore, the defendant

is liable to compensate to the plaintiff by paying the said sum

of Rs.1,00,000/- as per Clause 3 of the said Agreement. After

the defendant has committed a breach of terms of the

Agreement,   the    plaintiff   has   issued    a   legal    notice   on

22.08.2023 to the defendant demanding payment of the said

sum. However, the defendant despite receipt of the said legal

notice has issued an untenable reply notice dated 04.09.2023.

The cause of action for the suit arose on 31.01.2023. Hence,

the suit.

     3. After service of summons, the defendant has appeared

through his counsel and filed his detail written statement

denying the plaint averments. Hence, the defendant prays to

dismiss the suit.

     4. To prove the case of plaintiff, the Senior Manager-H.R

of the plaintiff company has got examined herself as P.W.1

and got marked 10 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10. During

cross examination of PW.1, the learned counsel for

defendant    got    marked       Ex.D1    and       Ex.D.2     through
 SCCH-4                           6                    SC No.193/2024

confrontation. The defendant has examined himself as DW.1

and got marked 3 documents on his behalf.

     5.   Heard the counsels of both sides and perused entire

materials on record.

     6.   On rival pleadings the following points arise for my

consideration.-

          1. Whether      the   plaintiff    proves   that
               defendant is liable to pay a sum of
               Rs.1,00,000/-    along       with   interest
               from the date of suit till the date of
               realization?
           2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the
               relief as sought for?
          3.   What order?
    7. My findings on the above points are as follows:

          Point No.1 : In the affirmative;
          Point No.2 : Partly in the affirmative;
          Point No.3 : As per the final orders,

                        :REASONS:
     8.   As these two points are inter connected with each

other to avoid repetition of the facts they are taken up together

for common discussion.
 SCCH-4                          7                SC No.193/2024

     9.   The plaintiff has examined himself as PW.1 and got

marked 10 documents as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10. Ex.P.1 is the

copy of letter of authority, Ex.P.2 is the copy of Board

resolution,    Ex.P3 is the copy of notice, Ex.P4 is the Postal

receipt, Ex.P5 is the Postal acknowledgment, Ex.P6 is the copy

of reply notice, Ex.P7 is the copy of letter of confirmation,

Ex.P8 is the copy of Appointment letter, Ex.P9 is the E-mail

correspondence letter and Ex.P10 is the Salary slip. During

the course of cross-examination of PW.1 nothing was elicited

from the mouth of PW.1.

     The defendant has examined himself as DW.1 and got

marked documents as per Ex.P.D1 to Ex.D.4.          DW.1 was

subjected to     cross-examination during the course of cross

examination DW.1 has admitted that as per Ex.P.8 dated

05.07.2021 Employees service agreement there is a clause

stating that in the event the employee intend to terminate the

employment agreement prior to the completion of the said

period of two years then employee agree to be liable to pay

Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the plaintiff company. It is

further admitted that since 12.11.2022 the DW.1 has
 SCCH-4                          8                 SC No.193/2024

remained unauthorized absent from work as per e-mail dated

14.12.2022. It is also admitted that he has not responded to

the said e-mail dated 14.12.2022 instead he has left the duty

on 31.01.2023. When such being the case, the defendant has

admitted that he is held liable for the Ex.P.8 agreement and

clause 10 of said Ex.P.8 agreement. Hence, in the absence of

specific defence raised by the defendant in his written

statement the evidence of PW.1 becomes unshaken.

     10. On perusal of deposition it is clear that, defendant

has failed to make the payment of outstanding amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- with interest.    The law is very clear that, in

absence of any agreement in relation to payment of interest.

The plaintiff company is entitled for reasonable interest. As per

the RBI rules and guidelines it is appropriate to award 6% per

annum towards interest rate. Hence, I answer point No.1 in

the Affirmative and point No.2 partly in the affirmative.

POINT NO.3:

     11. In view of my findings on above points, I proceed to

pass the following.-
 SCCH-4                           9                  SC No.193/2024

                         ORDER

The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed in part with cost.

The plaintiff company is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The defendant is liable to pay the decreed amount with interest to the plaintiff.

Draw decree accordingly.

[Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, then corrected by me and pronounced in open court on this the 1st day of September, 2025.] (Gayathri S Kate) XVIII ADDL.JUDGE & ACJM Court of Small Causes Bengaluru.

ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS:

PW.1 : Mrs. Latha G., SCCH-4 10 SC No.193/2024 LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT:

DW.1 : Sri. Channabasava S., LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS:
Ex.P1 : Copy of letter of authority Ex.P2 : Copy of Board resolution Ex.P3 : Copy of Notice Ex.P4 : Postal receipt Ex.P5 : Postal acknowledgment Ex.P6 : Copy of reply notice Ex.P7 : Copy of letter of confirmation Ex.P8 : Copy of Appointment letter Ex.P9 : E-mail correspondence letter Ex.P10 : Salary slip LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT:

Ex.D.1     :   Xerox Copy of letter of confirmation
Ex.D.2     :   E-mail ID and Confirmation Letter
Ex.D.3     :   Salary slip
Ex.D.4     :   Salary revision letter


XVIII ADDL.JUDGE & ACJM Court of Small Causes Bengaluru.
Digitally signed by GAYATHRI S
                     GAYATHRI                   KATE
                     S KATE                     Date: 2025.09.12
                                                15:35:22 +0530