Delhi District Court
Siddhartha Poonia vs Dalmia Biz Media Private Ltd on 1 April, 2025
THE COURT OF MR. VAIBHAV PRATAP SINGH
CIVIL JUDGE, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS
NEW DELHI DISTRICT, DELHI
CNR No. DLND03-000475-2024
CS No. 245/2024
In the matter of:-
SIDDHARTHA POONIA
R/o ED-1205, Eldeco Aamantran
Sector-119, Noida
Uttar Pradesh-201301 . . .Plaintiff
Versus
DALMIA BIZ. MEDIA PVT. LTD.
Through its Director/AR:
Registered Office:
M-B9, Indra Prakash Building
21, Barakhamba Road
New Delhi-110034
Also At:
Dalmia Bros, YMCA Building
Gate No.1, Jai Singh Marg
Hanuman Road Area, Connaught Place
New Delhi-110001
Also At:
B-38, First Floor, Institutional Area
Block B, Sector-1, Noida
Uttar Pradesh-201301 . . .Defendant
Date of Institution : 16.03.2024
Date of Reserving Judgment : 01.04.2025
Date of Judgment : 01.04.2025
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 81,000/- (RUPEES EIGHTY
ONE THOUSAND ONLY)
Digitally
signed by
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT VAIBHAV
VAIBHAV PRATAP
PRATAP SINGH
SINGH Date:
2025.04.01
15:13:11
1.The present suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 81,000/-
+0530 CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 1 of 8 by the Plaintiff against the Defendant.
2. Brief facts as alleged by the Plaintiff are that the Plaintiff is a law-abiding citizen of India with over 5 years of experience in marketing, earning significant goodwill in the business and the Plaintiff is filing this suit to recover unpaid salary from April 2023 to 24.05.2023, along with damages for the mental distress and financial hardship caused by Defendant's failure to make timely payments.
3. That Defendant company is a private company registered in New Delhi and deals in digital marketing.
4. That the Plaintiff joined Defendant Company on 13.12.2022 as a Senior Copywriter, with an agreed salary of Rs. 45,000 per month, as per the appointment letter.
5. That Defendant Company frequently delayed salary payments, often for months, causing financial strain and mental distress to the Plaintiff. Payments were also often partial and delayed.
6. That the Defendant Company paid employees arbitrarily, choosing who to pay based on perceived financial need, further exacerbating the Plaintiff's financial burden.
7. That due to salary delays, the Plaintiff had to take multiple loans to meet household expenses, and despite assurances, his salary from April 2023 to 24.05.2023, amounting CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 2 of 8 to Rs. 81,000, remains unpaid.
8. That by May 2023, the Plaintiff was struggling financially and, upon failure to receive his salary, submitted his resignation via email on 24.05.2023, also requesting payment of his pending salary.
9. That following the resignation, the Plaintiff's access to his company email and WhatsApp groups was revoked, confirming the acceptance of his resignation by Defendant Company.
10. That the Plaintiff has continued to follow up, but as of today, he has not received the Rs. 81,000 owed to him. The breakdown of dues is: Rs. 45,000 for the month of April and Rs. 36,000 for 24 days in May 2023.
11. That despite suffering financial instability, the Plaintiff waited for his salary and sent a legal notice on 14.08.2023 demanding payment of dues, but Defendant did not respond or pay the outstanding amount.
12. That instead, on 18.08.2023, Defendant issued a legal notice accusing the Plaintiff of violating non-compete clauses, despite no such clause existing in his appointment letter and his lack of access to client data after resignation.
13. That the Plaintiff replied to Defendant Company's notice on 07.09.2023, refuting their false allegations and CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 3 of 8 demanding the payment of dues, but Defendant failed to respond.
14. Thus, the Plaintiff has no other remedy but to file this suit for the recovery of the outstanding amount.
15. Summons was served upon Defendant on 06.11.2024, however, Defendant failed to appear before the Court. Hence, Defendant was proceeded ex-parte on 29.01.2025.
16. Thereafter, matter was fixed for ex-parte evidence. Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and filed his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW-1/A and relied upon the documents as under:
Sl Documents Exhibit/ Mark
No.
1. Offer Letter sent through e-mail Ex. PW1/1
dated 12.12.2022 (At page no.
21)
2. Acceptance of offer letter through Ex. PW1/2 (At
e-mail dated 12.12.2022 page no. 22)
3. Bank statement showing delayed Ex. PW1/3
payments of salary (from page no.
23-48)
4. Email dated 14.07.2023 sent by Ex. PW1/4 (At
CHRO of Defendant Company page no. 49)
5. Email dated 21.07.2023 containing Ex. PW1/5 (At false allegations page no. 50)
6. Legal notice dated 14.08.2023 Ex. PW1/6 (from page no.
51 to 53)
7. Postal receipts dated 16.08.2023 Ex. PW1/7 (A to B) (At page no. 54) CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 4 of 8
8. Legal notice dated 18.08.2023 sent Ex. PW1/8 by Defendant. (from page no.
55-59)
9. Reply dated 07.09.2023 to legal Ex. PW1/ 9 notice sent by Defendant (from page no.
60-69)
10. Postal recepts dated 07.09.2023 Ex. PW1/ 10 (A to E) (from page no. 70-
72)
11. Certificate under section 65B IEA Ex. PW1/ 11 (from page no.
73-74)
17. No other witness was sought to be summoned or examined by the Plaintiff. Accordingly, ex-parte evidence was closed.
18. Final arguments heard.
19. I have perused the record in light of the arguments advanced.
20. The present suit is well within the stipulated time of limitation and is also within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Since the amount claimed is less than Rs.3,00,000/-, this Court also has the pecuniary jurisdiction to hear this case.
21. Plaintiff has tendered in his evidence as PW-1 his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW-1/A and documents i.e. Offer letter sent through e-mail dated 12.12.2022, acceptance of CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 5 of 8 offer letter through e-mail dated 12.12.2022, Bank Statement, e- mail dated 14.07.2023, e-mail dated 21.07.2023 and reply to legal notice 07.09.2023, clearly establishing that the relationship between the Plaintiff and Defendant was one of employee and employer and that upon resignation of the Plaintiff, the Defendant has withheld his full and final settlement dues.
22. In somewhat similar circumstances, on this aspect, I held in Computer Junction Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar Pandey1 as follows:
"48. The names and contact details of businesses offering particular services are generally available in the public domain. Any competitor with appropriate industry knowledge would have access to such information and would be free to market their services to these businesses, even if they are currently utilizing the Plaintiff's services. In this regard, the Plaintiff's claim of confidentiality lacks a sound legal basis.
49. Moreover, any employee of the Plaintiff who interacts with the Plaintiff's customers or clients would naturally have access to such customer information, including contact details. This raises the question of how such an employee, upon moving to a competitor, could be restricted from offering the competitor's services to those clients or customers. Such a restriction could be seen as an unreasonable restraint of trade. In fact, business directories, which are readily accessible, allow for the identification of businesses within a particular industry, and the consumers of these services typically have many options to choose from.
50. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in the case of American Express Bank Ltd. v. Priya Puri, 2006 SCC OnLine Del 638, held that the plaintiff in that case, under the guise of confidentiality, was attempting to assert that once a customer of the plaintiff, always a customer of the plaintiff. The decision emphasized that it is ultimately the customer's choice to decide with which business to engage. Additionally, the Court ruled that the creation of a customer database and the subsequent claim of confidentiality therein did not justify the creation of a 1 Judgment dated 27.03.2025 [CNR No. DLND030009862021] CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 6 of 8 monopoly over such customers. The Court thus concluded that customer details do not constitute trade secrets or property.
51. Similar was the reasoning of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Mehar Karan Singh, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1243, while holding that information pertaining to 'strategic business plans,' 'product mix,' 'square footage of construction,' 'capital expenditure,' or 'revenue budgets' could not be regarded as confidential, as such information would be known to competitors in the industry."
23. Thus, similarly, contacting the clients of the Defendant would not be illegal for the Plaintiff to do after resignation whether or not there existed a clause forbidding the same. In any case, from the material on record, no non-compete clause appears to be in existence and e-mail dated 21.07.2023 Ex. PW1/5 would show that the said condition was added and imposed unilaterally by the Defendant after the resignation of the Plaintiff.
24. In any case, keeping in view the unrebutted testimony of PW-1 and documents relied upon, it can be said that the Plaintiff has duly established its case that Defendant has unlawfully withheld the amount due to the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not even bother to contest this case.
25. In view of the above discussion, the suit of the Plaintiff is decreed in the following terms:
1. Decree for an amount of Rs. 81,000/- is passed in favour of Plaintiff and against the Defendant.
2. Cost of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded as damages towards CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 7 of 8 financial loss, mental distress and litigation charges in favour of Plaintiff and against the Defendant.
26. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Pronounced by me in the Open Court on 01.04.2025.
Digitally signedVAIBHAV by VAIBHAV PRATAP SINGH PRATAP Date:
SINGH 2025.04.01 15:13:18 +0530 (VAIBHAV PRATAP SINGH) Civil Judge, New Delhi District Patiala House Courts, Delhi CS SCJ No. 245/2024 Siddhartha Poonia Vs. Dalmia Biz Media Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 8 of 8