Bombay High Court
John Cockerill India Limited vs Sanjay Kamalakar Navare on 19 December, 2022
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/5 3 CARBP-24703-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.24703 OF 2022
John Cockerill India Limited .. Petitioner
Versus
Sanjay Kamalakar Navare .. Respondent
WITH
COURT RECEIVER REPORT NO.390 OF 2022
IN
COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.24703 OF 2022
John Cockerill India Limited .. Petitioner
Versus
Sanjay Kamalakar Navare .. Respondent
...
Mr.Venkatesh Dhond, Senior Advocate with Mr.Rohan Kelkar,
Mr.Ankoosh Mehta, Mr.Sarah Navodia and Ms.Pragya Chandak i/
b Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas for the Petitioner.
Mr.Piyush Raheja with Mr.Subodh Kurudkar, Ms.Tejal Kurudkar,
Mr.Dharmesh Pandya and Ms.Ursula Misquitta i/b Kurdukar
Associates for the Respondent.
Ms.Rekha Rane, Ist Assistant to the Court Receiver, present.
...
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 19th DECEMBER, 2022
P.C:-
1. In furtherance of the order dated 28/11/2022, the Court
Receiver has submitted a report, dated 09/12/2022.
The report is taken on record.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2022 07:47:56 :::
2/5 3 CARBP-24703-22.odt
2. Perusal of the report would reveal that an inventory of
the devices in possession of the respondent was prepared by
the Technical Expert and the data in the aforesaid devices was
copied by him into external hard disks. The extraction of data
into external hard disks was done in presence of the
representative of the petitioner and the respondent himself.
The entire exercise was carried under the aegis of the Court
Receiver.
The report enlist the details of the data, that has been
transferred into four external hard disks, the description of
which is also furnished.
3. Upon the said procedure being carried out, the question
remains is, what should be done with the data.
The petitioner had appointed an Analyzer to analyze the
data, which it apprehended, that was transferred by the
respondent, who was it's ex-employee, for his own beneft. The
report highlighted that on analyzing the laptop of the
respondent, certain documents/fles were transferred through
external device and the details of which are found to be
compiled in the said report. Page 303 of the petition, which is
the gist of the report of the Expert, appointed by the petitioner,
makes reference to distinct fles, which include 27 traces of
data transferred from USB/external drive and 38 LNK
fles/folders present in the removable drive. There is also
reference to company related WhatsApp videos and images. In
short, total number of documents analyzed by the expert are
reported to be 52,964.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2022 07:47:56 :::
3/5 3 CARBP-24703-22.odt
Now the data from the devices of the respondent is
already transferred into the hard disks and it is only
necessary to ascertain, whether the data in the hard disks is
the same, to which a reference is made in the report of the
Expert appointed by the petitioner, in form of 52,964
documents.
4. A comparison has to be, therefore, drawn between the
two sets of data, the one alleged to have been transferred from
the laptop to distinct devices and the data which is retrieved
from various devices belonging to the respondent and now
stored in four hard disks through the orders of this Court.
When the question comes, as to who shall undertake this
exercise, the learned counsel for the respondent states that he
will leave it to the Court. He, however, submits that the
analysis should be done in presence of the respondent and his
Advocate if necessary, with his right being kept open, to call in
question the method by which the data is retrieved by the
Court Receiver and the Expert and also it's evidentiary value.
5. Taking into consideration the concern expressed by the
respondent, I deem it appropriate to pass the following order :-
: ORDER :
A) The data retrieved by the Court Receiver, in the presence of the Technical Expert, from the distinct devices belonging to the respondent and compiled in four hard disks, which are referred to in the report of the Court Receiver dated 09/12/2022, shall be compared with 52,964 documents found M.M.Salgaonkar ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2022 07:47:56 ::: 4/5 3 CARBP-24703-22.odt in the Cyforce Forensic Analysis Report, relied upon by the petitioner to exactly trace out, as to which data belongs to the petitioner company;
B) The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out by Mr.Mukesh Bhandarge, the Technical Expert, who has assisted the Court Receiver in transferring the data of the respondent into the hard disks; within a period of four weeks from today;
C) The Technical Expert shall intimate a date on which he desire to undertake the exercise of analysis of data for the purpose of comparison, so as to ensure the presence of the representative of the petitioner/it's Advocate and the respondent/his Advocate;
D) The Technical Expert shall submit his report to the Court within a period of four week thereafter in a sealed envelope.
E) The devices in possession of the respondent shall continue to remain sealed, though the Technical Expert shall segregate the data found in the four hard disks and the data which has no concern with the petitioner shall be deleted forthwith;
F) The petitioner, who is in possession of the laptop and which was analyzed by Cyforce Private Limited, shall also be made available to the Technical Expert for the purpose of analysis.
Further, the data which could not be retrieved by the Court Receiver from the rediffmail account of the respondent, despite it's password being provided, shall be permitted to be accessed with the assistance of the respondent.
M.M.Salgaonkar
::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2022 07:47:56 :::
5/5 3 CARBP-24703-22.odt
5. The aforesaid process, to be carried out, will not preclude the respondent from calling in question the procedure by which the data was retrieved by the Technical Expert, who has assisted the Court Receiver and which ultimately got transferred into four hard disks as well as the evidentiary value of the said data, if it was to be treated as evidence, in the proceedings before the Arbitrator.
6. List on 21/02/2023.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2022 07:47:56 :::