Bangalore District Court
Mr. Paritosh Dandriyal vs M/S. Adtec Electronic on 19 April, 2021
IN THE COURT OF XV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS: JUDGE AT BENGALURU. (CCH.No.3)
Dated this the 19 th day of April 2021.
O.S.No. 902 /2017
Present :- Sri. JAISHANKAR, B.Sc., LL.M .
XV Additional City Civil &
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
Plaintiff's :- Mr. Paritosh Dandriyal,
S/o(late) Shri U C Dandriyal,
Aged about 54 years,
Residing at No.A 1102, Prestige
Notting Hill, Opposite to
Meenakshi Temple,
Bannerghatta Road,
Bengaluru-560076.
(Rep.by K.P.R., Advocate)
V/s
Defendant's :- 1. M/s. ADTEC Electronic
Instruments Private Limited,
A private limited Company
registered under the provisions
of the Companies Act, 1956,
having its registered office at
No.563/1, Prerana towers,
Ranka Colony, Bannerghatta
Road, Bengaluru-560076.
2. Mr. S.N. Ravichandra,
Major by age,
S/o Nagasubramanian
Sundaram
Chairman and Managing
Director
M/s ADTEC Electronic
Instruments Private
LimitedNo.563/1, Prerana
towers, Ranka colony,
Bannerghatta Road,
Bengaluru-560076.
(D.1 & D.2 Rep.by A.N.K.,
Advocate)
Date of Institution of the 04.02.2017
suit:
Nature of the Suit (suit
for pronote, Suit for
declaration and Money Suit
possession, Suit for
injunction, etc.):
Date of the
commencement of
recording of the 25.07.2017
Evidence:
Date on which the
Judgment was 19.04.2021
pronounced:
Total duration: Year/s Month/s Day/s
04 02 15
J U DG M E N T
The plaintiff has filed this suit for a Judgment and
Decree against the defendant for a sum of Rs.24,51,782/-
together with costs and interest at the rage of 24% p.a.
from the date of suit till realization and to grant such
other reliefs which the court deems fit to grant.
2. The brief averments of the plaint are as
hereunder:-
That the plaintiff has served in Indian Army as
Colonel and has taken premature retirement. The
defendant No.2, who was the Chairman and Managing
Director of the defendant No.1 Company by looking at the
credentials, track record and integrity of the plaintiff has
appointed him as Director of the defendant No.1
Company vide letter dated 01.05.2013. The plaintiff's
salary was fixed Rs.1,90,000/- at the time of joining
employment in May 2013. With effect from April 2014,
the gross salary was fixed at Rs.2,00,000/- and the net
salary worked out to Rs.1,62,000/-, after deducting
income tax and other deductions. The defendant No.2 by
looking at the performance of the plaintiff, has
appointed him as Chief Executive Officer of the defendant
No.1 Company. The plaintiff was not paid salary regularly
and there was continuous default by the defendant No.1.
At the premise of the 2nd defendant to get clear the salary
at the earliest, the plaintiff continued in the employment
not intending to strain the relationship with the
defendant No.2. The plaintiff's salary was kept in arrears
continuously from July 2015 to May 2016. The plaintiff
salary is being wrongfully withheld by the defendant No.1
and inspite of repeated requests and pleadings, the
defendant No.2 has not cared to release his pending
salary. Being unable to carry on the employment, the
plaintiff tendered his resignation as Director and CEO
vide letter dated 17.04.2016 which has been duly
accepted. After his resignation, he had demanded his
arrears of salary payable to him and the defendant No.2
promised to clear the same at the time of relieving. The
plaintiff has been relieved from his services on
17.05.2016. The outstanding salary has not been paid at
the time of relieving and when he demanded the same,
the defendant No.2 promised to pay the same with
interest at the rate of 24% p.a. The plaintiff with an
intention to save the relationship and goodwill, he
accepted the relieving letter and the defendant No.2
agreed to clear the outstanding salaries by the end of
May 2016. He had been promised regular appraisals and
Performance Linked Incentives (PLI) during his tenure of
employment. The other employees of the defendant were
given the same and he has been denied the same. He
reserves his right to claim the PLI. The defendant No.1
has not deposited the TDS amount deducted from his
salary with the income tax Authorities in respect of the
salary of the year 2016-17. As result, his IT return has
not been accepted. Though, he requested several times
and sent reminders to the defendants to clear the
arrears of salary, the did not pay the same. With no
other alternative, he got issued the legal notice. He has
undergone great stress, strain and mental agony on
account of the harassment caused to him due to non
clearance of his dues by the defendant No.2. He was
compelled to exhauast all his savings to sustain and to
maintain himself and his family in Bengaluru. As such,
he needs compensation of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-.
The defendant No.2 has grossly violated the Income Tax
Rules. He has paid high income tax on his pension after
taking into consideration the salary portion and he has
also earned bad reputation from the Tax Authorities. The
defendants have not paid his full salary from July 2015
to 17.05.2016 on which dates his resignation letter was
accepted. Inspite of issuance of notice, the defendants
have not paid the amount due to him. As on the date of
the suit, the defendants are liable to pay a sum of
Rs.24,51,782.00/-. Hence, the suit.
3. The defendants have appeared through their
Counsel and filed their written statement. They have
contended as follows :-
That the suit is not maintainable either in law or on
facts. The plaintiff is suppressio varie and suggestio
falsie. He has suppressed the material facts and
approached the Court with unclean hands. The alleged
claim of the plaintiff is not in accordance with agreed
terms. The plaintiff is not at all entitled to claim any
relief let alone the alleged Rs.24,51,782/-. The
allegations made in para No.2 that the plaintiff has
served in Indian Army as Colonel may be correct.
Further allegations that based on his credentials, track
record and integrity he was appointed as Director of
defendant No.1 Company is false. The plaintiff has to
prove of the allegations made in para Nos. 4 and 5 of the
plaint. The allegations made in para No.6 of the plaint are
false. It is incorrect that the plaintiff was relieved from
services on 17.05.2016 from the defendant No.1
Company. It is false that they have promised to pay
interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the
outstanding salary. They never assured to pay the
interest as alleged by the plaintiff. There was no contract
or understanding with regard to the payment of the
alleged interest. When there is gross negligence on the
part of the plaintiff in discharging his duty, the
questions of demanding any amount as interest is
unmeaning and does not arise for consideration. The
allegations made in para Nos. 7 to 10 are all false. There
is no truth in the said allegations. There is no cause of
action to file the present suit. Only to drag them to the
Court, vexatious allegations are made against them. The
allegations made in para No.12 are all one without there
being any basis or documentary proof. The plaintiff is
claiming the amount against the defendants at his whims
and fancies. Absolutely, the plaintiff is not entitled to
claim alleged amount. The very claim of the plaintiff is
against to the law and not permissible. There is no merit
in the suit and it is liable to be dismissed. On all these
grounds, the defendants have prayed for dismissal of the
suit.
4. Based on the above pleadings, the following issues
have been framed in this suit :-
1.Whether plaintiff proves that defendants have not paid salary to the plaintiff and they are liable to pay arrears of salary to the plaintiff to the tune of Rs.17,28,775/- ?
2. Whether plaintiff further proves that defendants are liable to pay interest to the plaintiff @ 24% per annum on the arrears of salary ?
3. Whether plaintiff proves that he is entitle to recover sum of Rs.24,51,782/- from the defendants ?
4. What order ?
5. In order to prove his case, the plaintiff has examined himself as P.W.1 and he has got marked 8 documents as Exs. P.1 to P.8. The Authorized person of the defendant No.1 Company has examined himself as D.W.1 and he has got marked Board Resolution as Ex.D.1. I have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials on record. Having regard to the arguments heard and the materials on record, I answer the above issues as hereunder :-
Issue No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative Issue No.2 :- Partly in the affirmative Issue No.3 :- Partly in the affirmative Issue No.4 :- As per final order R E AS O NS
6. Issue No.1 :- It is not in dispute in this case that the plaintiff was appointed as Director of the defendant No.1 Company vide appointment letter dated 01.05.2013. It is also not in dispute that the salary of the plaintiff at the time of joining employment during May 2013 was fixed at Rs.1,90,000/-. The plaintiff has alleged about the said facts in para Nos. 3 and 4 of the plaint.
7. The plaintiff who is examined as P.W.1 has reiterated the above said facts in his affidavit filed in lieu of his examination in chief. In support of his oral evidence, he has got marked the Appointment Letter dated 01.05.2013 issued by the defendants along with annexure I as Ex.P.1. He has also got marked the Letter dated 16.05.2016 issued by the Authorized Signatory of defendant No.1 Company as Ex.P.2. The Authorized Signatory of defendant No.1 Company who is examined as D.W.1 has admitted in his cross examination at page No.9 that it is true to suggest that during May 2013, the plaintiff was appointed as Director and CEO of the defendant No.1 Company. It is true to suggest that Ex.P.1 letter is signed by the defendant No.2 and it was given to the plaintiff. It is true to suggest that in Ex.P.1, the gross salary of the plaintiff is shown as Rs.1,90,000/- per month. As such, Ex.P.1 and the admissions made by D.W.1 during his cross examination clearly show that the salary of the plaintiff at the time of his appointment during May 2013 was fixed at Rs.1,90,000/- per month. Further, the plaintiff has clearly stated in his evidence that his salary was enhanced to Rs.2,00,000/- with effect from April 2014 and the net salary was worked out at Rs.1,62,000/- after deducting income tax and other deductions. In Ex.P.2 which is an admitted document, it is shown that salary payable for the period from August 2015 to February 2016 is Rs.1,62,000/- per month. As such, this entry made in Ex.P.2 corroborates the evidence of P.W.1 that his salary was Rs.2,00,000/- with effect from April 2014. The defendants have not produced any documents with regard to the salary of the plaintiff. As such, the evidence of P.W.1 has to be accepted.
8. Further, the plaintiff has mentioned in para No.12 of the plaint that an amount of Rs.17,28,775/- is due from the defendant No.1 Company to him towards the arrears of salary. He has got marked Ex.P.2 issued by the defendant No.1 Company with regard to the arrears of salary to be paid to him. In the said document, it is shown that a sum of Rs.17,28,595/- is due to the plaintiff by the defendant No.1 Company towards arrears of salary. The Authorized Signatory of the defendant No.1 Company who is examined as D.W.1 has not denied the said fact in his evidence. He has also not denied the issuance of Ex.P.2. As such, since Ex.P.2 is not disputed by the defendants and since it is mentioned in the said document that the amount due to the plaintiff towards the arrears of salary is Rs.17,28,595/-, it has to be held that the defendants are due in a sum of Rs.17,28,595/- to the plaintiff towards the arrears of salary. The plaintiff has shown in para No.12 of the plaint that the arrears of salary amount due is Rs.17,28,775/- which is in excess of Rs.180 than the amount mentioned in Ex.P.2. As such, it has to be held that the plaintiff is entitled for the amount mentioned in Ex.P.2 which is Rs.17,28,595/-. Hence, I answer issue No.1 partly in the affirmative.
9. Issue No.2 :- The plaintiff has alleged in para No.6 of the plaint that at the time of tendering his resignation he had demanded his arrears salary payable to him and the defendant No.2 had promised to him to clear the same at the time of relieving. The outstanding salary has not been paid at the time of relieving and when he demanded the same, the defendant No.2 promised to pay interest @ 24% p.a. for the outstanding salary when it became due. The plaintiff who is examined as P.W.1 has reiterated the same in para No.7 of his affidavit. But, in his cross examination at page No.7 he has stated that "it is true that in Ex.P.1, there is no mention regarding the interest of 24% per annum. It is true that there is no written contract between him and the defendants with regard to the payment of interest at the rate of 24% per annum". As such, the plaintiff himself has admitted that there is no written agreement between him and the defendants that the interest shall payable at the rate of 24% per annum on the arrears of salary. As such, as of right, he is not entitled to claim interest at the rate of 24% per annum. But, the amount payable to the plaintiff by the defendants is to words the arrears of salary. The resignation letter and the acceptance letter are produced by the plaintiff and they have been marked as Exs.P.3 and P.4. The plaintiff has also produced the copy of legal notice, postal receipts, E-mail correspondence made with the defendant No.2 and also the printed version of Whatts-App messages and they have been marked as Exs.P.5 to P.8. Ex.P.3 reveal that the plaintiff has given the said resignation letter on 17.04.2016 and it has been accepted on the same day as per Ex.P.4. Inspite of that, the defendants have not paid the arrears of salary to the plaintiff. This suit is filed in the year 2017 and now we are in the year 2021. Till today, the arrears of salary shown in Ex.P.2 is not paid to the plaintiff by the defendants. Already 5 years is elapsed from the date of resignation of the plaintiff from the defendant No.1 Company. As such, since there is inordinate delay in payment of arrears of salary, the plaintiff is entitled for interest on the amount due to him towards the arrears of salary. But, the claim of 24% per annum is to exorbitant. In the E-mails sent by the plaintiff marked as Ex.P.7, he has requested the defendants to pay the arrears of salary. In the reply given by the defendant No.2, it can be seen that he has requested for time to pay the amount due by stating that they are in financial difficulty. The said E-mail communications and Whatts-App messages marked as Ex.P.8 show that the defendants have requested for time to pay the arrears of amount due to the plaintiff towards his salary. As such, in view of the above facts and the period from which the amount is due and also considering the nature of the job of plaintiff , it is just and proper to direct the defendants to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the arrears of salary. Hence, I answer this issue partly in the affirmative
10. Issue No.3 :- The plaintiff has filed this suit for recovery of arrears of salary, interest at the rate of 24% per annum, for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- and a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards notice charges. In all, the plaintiff has claimed a sum of Rs.24,51,782/- stating that the said amount is due from the defendants as on the date of the suit. He has clearly mentioned the amount due at para No.12 of the plaint. He has also sought for interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of suit till realization. As for as compensation amount of Rs.3,00,000/- is concerned, the plaintiff has pleaded at para No.9 of the plaint that he had undergone great stress, strain and mental agony on account of the harassment caused to him due to non clearance of his dues by the defendant No.2. He was compelled to exhaust all his savings to sustain and maintain himself and his family in Bengaluru. Hence, he needs to be adequately compensated by an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- which needs to be paid by the defendants.
11. The plaintiff who is examined as P.W.1 has stated at para No.7 of his affidavit that he is entitled for compensation towards mental agony. During his cross examination at page No.9, P.W.1 has stated that he has suffered financial problem and hence he has sought for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. Though, he has stated that there was no harassment by the defendants, he has stated since he has suffered mental agony and he shifted his family to Bangalore and since, he was paying high rents and he had to pay the fees to his son and daughter, he suffered financial problems. During the course of the arguments, the Counsel for the plaintiff argued that after filing of the suit, the plaintiff had to come from Delhi for several times during evidence and other stages of the case. He had to travel from Delhi only because of the non payment of the arrears of salary. As such, it is necessary to award compensation.
12. It may be true that the plaintiff has suffered mental stress and mental agony as huge amount is due by the defendants to him towards arrears of salary. In his affidavit filed in lieu of his examination in chief he has shown the address of New Delhi. This show that the plaintiff has traveled from Delhi to attend this Court. As such, in view of the evidence of P.W.1 and the materials on record, it is just and proper to direct the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards the mental stress and mental agony and also towards the traveling expenses of the plaintiff for conducting this case. As such, though the plaintiff has sought for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-, it is just and proper to grant a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the plaintiff. As observed above, as for as the arrears of salary is concerned, the plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.17,28,595/- with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from 16.05.2016. Hence, I answer this issue partly in the affirmative
13. Issue No.4 :- In view of the above findings on issue Nos.1 to 3, hence the following is made :-
O R DE R The suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs in part.
The plaintiff is entitled to recovery a sum of Rs.17,28,595/- from the defendants with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on Rs.17,28,595/- from 16.05.2016 till the date of realization.
The plaintiff is also entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the defendants towards compensation.
The defendants No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the said amounts and they are directed to pay the same within 3 months from the date of this order.
Office is directed to draw decree
accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19 th day of April 2021) (Jaishankar) XV Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru A N N E X U R E WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:-
P.W.1 :- Paritosh Dandriyal DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF: -
Ex.P.1 Original Appointment Letter dated 01.05.2013 Ex.P.2 Letter dated 16.05.2016 Ex.P.3 Copy of the Resignation Letter dated 17.04.2016 Ex.P.4 Relieving Letter issued by the defendant No.1 dated 16.05.2016 Ex.P.5 The Office Copy of the Legal Notice dated 06.12.2016 Ex.P.5(a) & Two Speed Post Acknowledgment
(b) Ex.P.6 Salary Certificate issued by defendant No.1 Ex.P.7 E-mail Communications with the defendant Company dated 07.02.2016 Ex.P.8 Whats-App Messages WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE DEFENDANTS :-
D.W.1 :- S.R. Manikanta DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS :-
Ex.D.1 Board Resolution dated
04.11.2019
(Jaishankar)
XV Addl.City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru.