Delhi District Court
M/S Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs . Vikrant Kumar on 15 February, 2016
M/s Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vikrant Kumar
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE02 (SOUTH)
SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
In the matter of :
CS No. 740/14
M/s Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Office at R10, Khirki Extension,
3rd floor, Malviya Nagar,
New Delhi ... Plaintiff
Versus
Mr. Vikrant Kumar
S/o Sh. Subhash Chand Malik,
241, Bahadurpur,
TehsilSardhana,
Meerut, UP
Also at
C/o Shyam Singh (Foji)
Street1, Sector44, Challera,
Near Shiv Mandir,
Noida, UP .... Defendant
Date of Institution : 18.12.2014
Date of Reserving Judgment : 15.02.2016
Date of Decision : 15.02.2016
Final Decision : Partly Decreed
J U D G M E N T
(on suit for Recovery of Rs.2,97,600/)
1. This suit was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.2,97,600/ alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 18% against the defendant.
CS No. 740/14 1 of 4 M/s Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vikrant Kumar
2. Briefly stated, case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is a Pvt.
Ltd. Company duly incorporated under the Companies Act 1956. That plaintiff company is engaged in the business of software development and services including Linux Training, Support Services, Product development etc, under the name and style of M/s. Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. That in the month of January 2012, the defendant was desirous to join as a software engineer who would learn and master installation, configuration, interface and reports customization of Koha and DSpace applications and therefore he joined the plaintiff with commitment to contribute his ability towards developing software services as well as building up team after learning as explained above. That believing on commitment of the defendant, the plaintiff started providing costly and extensive training for making the defendant as expert Engineer in Library Domain work. That after completion of said expensive training and consideration of persuasion, the plaintiff appointed/confirmed the defendant at the post of "Sr. Software Engineer" on a monthly remuneration of Rs. 20,000/ including all allowances vide appointment letter dated 01.04.2013 subject to fulfillment of terms and conditions of the service as mentioned categorically and specifically in the said appointment letter. That the defendant, understanding all the necessary terms and conditions of the employment of Sr. Soft Engineer, signed the acceptance letter on 01.04.2013 thereby agreeing to work as per the terms and conditions mentioned in said appointment letter. The defendant started completion of assigned work but without any intimation or formal request for grant of leave, the defendant stopped attending the work from 24.07.2013 leaving project in Midway. That later on, the defendant sent his resignation through Email dated 28.07.2013 to the plaintiff on the ground of personal reason and gave up the Job without CS No. 740/14 2 of 4 M/s Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vikrant Kumar completing the assigned work contrary to the agreed terms and condition of the appointment letter dated 01.04.2013. That it is worth mentioning that while signing the appointment letter the defendant has accepted the terms and condition of service regarding Termination. That the defendant himself violated the terms and conditions of the service by not serving the mandatory notice of three months prior to leaving the job, therefore he is liable to pay Rs. 2,40,000/ along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of resignation i.e. 28.07.2013. Hence, the present suit is filed by the plaintiff seeking following relief.
(1) Decree for recovery of Rs.2,97,600/ alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 18% against the defendant.
3. Notice of the suit was duly served upon the defendant.
However, none appeared on behalf of the defendant neither any written statement (WS) filed. Therefore, defence of the defendant was struck off and he proceeded exparte vide order dated 16.11.2015.
4. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff examined Sh. Sudhir Gandotra who tendered his evidence way of affidavit i.e. Ex.PW1/1. He relied upon documents Ex.PW1/A (board resolution dated 22.11.2014), Mark A (Resume is deexhibited as mentioned in my affidavit Ex.PW1/B), Mark B (Appointment Letter is deexhibited as mentioned in my affidavit Ex.PW1/C), Mark C (Payment ledger is de exhibited as mentioned in my affidavit Ex.PW1/D) and Ex.PW1/E (resignation letter through email dated 28.07.2013) and thereafter, plaintiff closed its exparte evidence.
5. I have heard the exparte arguments on behalf of the plaintiff and also gone through case file carefully.
CS No. 740/14 3 of 4 M/s Openlx Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vikrant Kumar
6. It must also be noted here that the testimony of PW1 has gone absolutely and entirely unrebutted and unchallenged and there is nothing on record which casts a shadow of doubt on his testimony. Documents relied upon by the plaintiff have also been duly proved. The plaintiff has claimed an interest of Rs.57,600/ @18% per annum included in the recoverable amount but admittedly there has not been any written agreement between the parties qua the charging of interest. Hence, plaintiff cannot claim the interest amount.
7. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that plaintiff has been able to prove its case by leading cogent evidence. Hence, suit of the plaintiff is hereby partly decreed and a decree for recovery of Rs. 2,40,000/ along with the interest @ 12% per annum from the date of institution of the present suit till realization of the decretal amount is hereby passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. Costs of the suit are also awarded to the plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
8. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Court on 15th February 2016 (Vishal Pahuja) CJ02 (South)/Saket Courts New Delhi/15.02.2016 CS No. 740/14 4 of 4