Karnataka High Court
Aricent Inc vs Sasken Communication Technologies ... on 5 October, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS ON THE 5TH DAY OF' OCTOBER, 240 BEFORE 3 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE_1V-LBILLAP' - MISC. FIRST APPEAL No.820i_ 0:5? 25 BETWEEN: 1. Aricent Inc, A Company registered urrder _ . _ the laws of the Cayman 'islands arid C having its registered office at ' * 700, Hansen Way; _ . » Palo Alto, CA 94304,' : United ' » 2. Aricent 3 _ .. vBangaJ§pre#56O 0'8E7., _____ M _ (Holdings) Lin1ited.."=- A No.18/1, ECO-zen; _ " ;j ._ Outer Ring Roar}, V' _ V Panathnr Post', _ APPELLANTS Sr} LK, Ka.su 1F§,Tf()If _ Sri.S . Basavaraj, Advs .) " A Sasken Communication ' C' " ~ Teclinologies... Limited, CO-»mpan&y registered under _ ._ 'Tlfae 'COz:1;:anies Act, __ ' ~I:_I_a'v*ing registered 8: Corporate j A Q'fi"1Ce---at 139/25, 12/ Ring road, Domlur, Banga}ore--560 07 1. Represented by its Company Secretary and Compliance Officer Mr.R.Vitta1. ...RESPONDE.NT (By Sri.George Joseph for DUA Associates) =i==!=**=!=>k* The Miscellaneous First Appeal'"u'11der'..gOrdei"./i3 it 1(R] r/W Sec.151 of c.p.c. against the:.oniersodatedi ::;e(V*;[igt2:iiio passed on LA. No.1 in O.S. No.2:5'9_25/h2'Q XIII Additional City Civil Judge;"'c*Mayoha11~aijnit, 'Bangalore (cc1~1»22), partly al1oWingi".Ai Nofiifl iiiea junder order 39 Rule land 2 ofC.P.C. for ":11. i A This Miscellaneous First_:'Appea}.._con1ing on for orders this day, E 'VtJflD§eMENT This. ', flapgjéeaiyi against the order dated its/"7./2'sio§..i'-passedxiziftlie XIII Additional City Civil Judge. iaa:ioisV;1$:a.25925/ 10, oI1I.A.No.i. impugned order, the trial Court has "iii.-Tiifestrained"the appellants, their subsidiaries, affiliates etc.. soliciting, making offers or inducing the respondents
L/a 3 employees of the ALU Project to join the subsidiauy companies, till disposal of the suit.
3. The learned counsel for the respondentypslnlonjiits that the impugned order only restrains the soliciting, making offers or inducing th'e"*re'_spondent's"
employees of the ALU Project to join the and it does not in any way 'restrain "the .ern.plo_ye.eVs .5fron1,"
voluntarily joining the appellants,_._.fl'
4. The learned eo'u:l1'sel"-- submits that the impugrledlloider b:fie=ela.rii':leVd@that way. Accordiriglyl, order is clarified as follows; While 'va'ppella'nt--s;__their subsidiaries etc., are restrained from V:s'01Vivcitirlg;«.,jrn.aking offers or inducing the respondents Vemplloyeeis ALU Project to join the subsidiary '7»._.een1panies,;7i.,t yvill not come in the way of the employees joining the appellants or the appellants taking the employees who are willing to join the appellants voluntarily. All contentians of the parties are left open. The .E1_I3E3ea1 is disposed of, accordingly. .4 L1"/JS