Delhi District Court
M/S Campuseai (India) Private Limited vs Also At on 30 October, 2018
IN THE COURT OF MS. VINEETA GOYAL, ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE - 03 (SOUTH) SAKET COURT COMPLEX, NEW
DELHI
CS No.1001/2017
CNR No. DLST010089212017
In the matter of :
M/s Campuseai (India) Private Limited
Having registered office:
E2A, Khasra No. 224225, Neb Valley,
Neb Sarai, New Delhi 110068. ......Plaintiff
V E R S U S
Kapil Shandilya
S/o Madhusudan Sharma
R/o House No. M108,
Aruna Appartments, IP Extension,
Delhi 110092
Also At:
Plot No. 4/5 Ambika Sadan Pant,
Puri, Jawahar Nagar, Meerut
Uttar Pradesh 250001 .......Defendant
Date of institution : 14.11.2017
Reserved for Judgment : 30.10.2018
Date of decision : 30.10.2018
Presence : Ms. Ashima Puri Chhibbar and Ms. Divya Chugh, Counsel
for the plaintiff.
None for the defendant.
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present summary suit for recovery of Rs.5,25,000(Rs. Five Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only) along with the interest under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against CS No:1001/2017 Page no. 1 of 4 the defendant.
2. Facts as narrated in the plaint are that the plaintiff is a company interalia involved in software publishing, consultancy and supply software publishing includes production, supply and documentation of readymade (noncustomized) software, operating system and other application software, computer games software for all platforms. The present suit is instituted by duly authorized representative of the plaintiff Sh. Avijit Sharma. The defendant was appointed as an employee of the plaintiff at the post of Account Manager vide appointment letter dated 02.03.2015 on the term of three years i.e. till 01.03.2018. As the plaintiff was involved in the business of IT support and software development, it takes utmost care for protection its data and confidential information. The plaintiff, therefore, to protect its important information and data executes a confidentiality agreement with all employees recruited with the company. Similarly, while recruiting the defendant, the plaintiff entered into a Confidentiality Agreement dated 02.03.2015 alongwith Training Agreement and employment agreement, all dated 02.03.2015 and the defendant was bound by the terms of said agreement. The plaintiff has further averred that as per the Employment Agreement, the defendant was bound to adhere to the Training Agreement and its clauses and if in case, he fails to do so, he will be liable to pay 30% of CTC (Cost to Company) per annum i.e. 30% of Rs. 17,50,000/ which comes to Rs.5,25,000/. The defendant duly joined the services of the plaintiff and duly completed his probation period. Shockingly, post receiving the salary for the month of July 2017 on 11.08.2017 the defendant absconded from discharging his duties at the plaintiff's office. Being employed at such an important position, the defendant did not inform about his plan of CS No:1001/2017 Page no. 2 of 4 disassociation. The defendant in a very unprofessional way wrote an e mail dated 11.08.2017 to the plaintiff stating that the defendant shall not discharge services at plaintiff's office going forward. The defendant being well aware of his contractual agreement, this illegal act of absconding, therefore, it is apparent that the defendant with his full understanding had chosen to breach the contractual obligations arising out of agreement executed by him with the plaintiff. A legal notice dated 21.10.2017 was sent to the defendant vide email and speed post however, no reply was received from the defendant. The defendant without informing the plaintiff stopped coming to office w.e.f. 11.08.2017 and despite repeated calls and reminder did not join his services. The defendant violated and breached the terms of training agreement, employment agreement and confidentiality agreement, all dated 02.03.2015 and the defendant is liable to pay Rs.5,25,000/ to the plaintiff as liquidated damages in lieu of the compensation.
3. The defendant has been served through email. Affidavit of service by email alongwith print copy of email and affidavit under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act 1872 is on record in which it is mentioned that the defendant was served with scanned copy of summons through email. The defendant was served through email through nazarat branch. The downloaded copy of email print out is already on record which is dated 28.08.2018. The requisite time of appearance has already expired because this is a suit under Order XXXVII CPC.
4. I have heard arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and gone through the record. Record shows that it is the suit for recovery of Rs.5,25,000/ on account of liquidated damages in lieu of the compensation CS No:1001/2017 Page no. 3 of 4 filed by the plaintiff alleging that liability of the defendant arose under the Training Agreement, Employment Agreement and Confidentiality Agreement all dated 02.03.2015 executed with the plaintiff.
5. It is averred by the plaintiff that the defendant has been paid full salary of the month of July 2017 and the defendant without giving any intimation to the plaintiff absented himself from the work without any reason. As per clause 7.1 of agreement on breach of training agreement, the employee has agreed to pay 30% of Annual CTC by way of compensation under the terms of the training agreement. It is evident from record that the defendant stopped coming to the office from 11.08.2017 and despite several reminders did not join the services and further failed to adhere with the terms of training agreement. As mentioned above, despite service of email, the defendant did not appear to controvert the case of the plaintiff and the prescribed period of 10 days for filing of appearance has already been expired, hence as per Order XXXVII (2) (3) of CPC the allegation as contained in the plaint are deemed to be proved and admitted by the defendant and accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled for the decree in its favour and against the defendant. Hence, this suit of the plaintiff is decreed against the defendant for Rs.5,25,000(Rs. Five Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only) alongwith pendentlite and future interest @ 6% p.a till its realization. Costs of the suit is also awarded in favor of the plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
Digitally signed VINEETA by VINEETA
GOYAL
Pronounced in the Open Court
GOYAL Date: 2018.10.30
on 30.10.2018 16:24:19 +0530
(Vineeta Goyal)
Additional District Judge03 (S)
Saket Court Complex,
New Delhi.
CS No:1001/2017 Page no. 4 of 4