Delhi District Court
Aksh Optifibre Ltd vs Amit Kumar Singh on 9 October, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MONA TARDI KERKETTA,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-06,
SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, DELHI
CS DJ No.775/2021
CNR No. DLSE01- 009026-2021
M/s. Aksh Optifibre Ltd.,
A-32, 2nd Floor,
Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate,
Mathura Road,
New Delhi-110044.
.....Plaintiff
Versus
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh,
House No. 664, Ground Floor,
Saraswati Vihar, Village Chakarpur,
Gurgaon, Haryana-1220022
..... Defendant
Date of Filing : 22.10.2021
Date of Final Arguments : 24.07.2023
Date of Judgment : 09.10.2023
Final Decision : Suit Decreed.
Appearances:
For Plaintiff : Sh. Mayank Dias, Adv.
Defendant proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.07.2022.
SUIT FOR PERMANENT & MANDATORY
INJUNCTIONS AND DAMAGES
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1.The brief facts of the case as disclosed in the plaint are that plaintiff is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing optical fibre cables. Defendant was appointed by CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 1 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi plaintiff vide appointment letter dated 04.08.2020 to the position of Process Leader - Marketing OFC (International). During the course of employment, defendant was assigned with onerous duties and responsibilities in the capacity of his position in the Company and accordingly sensitive and confidential information and data were shared with him during the discharge of his duties.
2. It is further stated that defendant vide email dated 13.05.2021 resigned which was duly accepted by plaintiff and accordingly the last working day of defendant with plaintiff was 13.06.2021. At the time of exit, plaintiff reminded defendant of his obligations as set out in his appointment letter, which continued to bind him for a limited period. Defendant duly assented to the same and issued a declaration dated 15.06.2021 without any protest or demur, being fully aware of his undertakings and its legal implications. It is further stated that in the above said declaration, defendant accepted and undertook not to engage with the competitors of plaintiff and to pay compensation to plaintiff in case of breach of such provision as mentioned in the declaration dated 15.06.2021. Defendant also undertook to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all information made available and disclosed to him during the course of his employment with plaintiff and that he shall not approach clients, vendors and/or employees of plaintiff for a period of one year and in the event of breach of his commitment, he shall be liable to face any civil or criminal action.
3. It is further stated that in August, 2021, plaintiff CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 2 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi learnt that defendant had joined the services of plaintiff's direct competitor M/s Orient Cables India Pvt. Ltd. and he had been approaching the clients and customers of plaintiff to solicit their business and dissuade them from continuing to do business with plaintiff. Defendant had sent emails to the clients of plaintiff on behalf of M/s Orient Cables India Pvt. Ltd. soliciting their business. It is further stated that defendant had forged and copied the design and data specification sheet of plaintiff, which had been shared with defendant by plaintiff in confidence during his employment with plaintiff, by just replacing the logo of plaintiff with the logo of M/s. Orient Cables India Pvt. Ltd. By doing so, defendant violated his contractual confidentiality covenant and infringed the intellectual property right of plaintiff.
4. It is further stated that plaintiff had invested substantial amount of time and money in training defendant to enable him to carry out his duties for plaintiff. The conduct of defendant caused damaged and pecuniary loss to plaintiff amounting to Rs.6,32,796/- equivalent to 6 months basic pay last drawn in service of plaintiff. The breach of confidentiality and violation also caused damage and pecuniary loss amounting to Rs.10,00,000/- and as such defendant is cumulatively liable to pay an amount of Rs.16,32,796. Hence, the present suit.
5. Plaintiff prayed to pass the following relief in its favour and against defendant :
5.1) A decree granting damages of an amount of Rs.16,32,796/- along with interest @ 24% per annum.
CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 3 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi 5.2) A decree of permanent and mandatory injunction thereby restraining defendant from divulging and disclosing any further confidential information of plaintiff to any other entity;
restraining defendant from carrying on and / or soliciting business from clients/customers/vendors of plaintiff by utilizing the list obtained from the database exclusively owned by plaintiff but accessible to defendant while in employment with plaintiff. 5.3) Cost of the suit.
5.4) Any other relief which this Court may deem fit and proper.
6. On receiving summons of the suit, defendant entered his appearance through his counsel Sh. Gautam Bajaj, Advocate, on 17.01.2022. Vide order dated 17.01.2022, defendant was directed to file vakalatnama during the course of the day and a written statement within statutory period with an advance copy to the opposite party. However, in compliance of the said order, defendant did not take any step. So much so, defendant and his counsel stopped appearing after 12.04.2022. Consequently, vide order dated 11.07.2022, defendant was proceeded ex-parte.
7. Subsequent thereto, the matter was fixed for ex parte plaintiff's evidence. In order to prove its case, plaintiff examined Sh. Sushil Wattal, Process Associate (Corporate Affairs Legal) as PW-1 who tendered his ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A and relied upon the following documents :
Ex.PW1/1 (OSR) Copy of appointment letter dated 04.08.2020.
CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 4 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi Ex.PW1/2 (OSR) Resignation tendered by defendant vide email dated 13.05.2021.
Ex.PW1/3 (OSR) Copy of declaration /memorandum of undertaking given by defendant dated 15.06.2021.
Ex.PW1/4 Design & Data Specification sheet of plaintiff company.
Ex.PW1/5 Design & Data Specification sheet of Orient cables India Pvt. Ltd.
Ex.PW1/6 Screen-shot showing similarity between design and data specification sheets.
Ex.PW1/7 Copy of email along with the screen-shot of the Whatsapp chat.
Ex.PW1/8 Affidavit under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act.
Ex.PW1/9 Power of attorney dated 16.03.2023 issued in his favour.
8. Plaintiff closed its ex-parte evidence vide separate statement of Sh. Sushil Wattal, Process Associate (Corporate Affairs Legal) on 15.05.2023.
9. Subsequent thereto, the matter was fixed for ex-parte final arguments which were heard conclusively on 24.07.2023. Plaintiff relied upon the following judgments in support of its arguments :
(a) Vogueserve International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajesh Gosain and Ors. CS (OS) 1436/2012 decided on 08.08.2023 by CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 5 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi Hon'ble High Court of Delhi;
(b) Burlington Home Shopping Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajnish Chibber decided on 20.10.1995 by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
10. Subsequent thereto, the matter was fixed for pronouncement of ex-parte judgment.
11. In order to prove the case, PW-1/plaintiff deposed in consonance with the contents of the plaint and brought on record documents as exhibited in his testimony. Ex.PW-1/1 records appointment of defendant with plaintiff as Process Leader - Marketing OFC (International) ; Ex.PW-1/2 records resignation of defendant from plaintiff on 13.05.2021 ; Ex.PW-1/3 records declaration of defendant whereby defendant accepted and undertook not engage with the competitors of plaintiff and made himself bound under Clause 3 of said declaration ; Ex.PW-1/6 records similarity between design and data specification sheet of the two companies as shown in Ex.PW-1/4 & Ex.PW-1/5 ; Ex.PW-1/7 records attempt of defendant to solicit business from the clients/customers/vendors of plaintiff ; Ex.PW-1/8 is the certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act in support of exhibited documents procured digitally.
12. Defendant did not contest the present suit by joining the proceedings despite having notice of the contents of the plaint, therefore, the version of plaintiff is deemed to have been accepted as true and correct by defendant. The exhibited documents on record and also the oral deposition of plaintiff is as such believable so far as relief of recovery of damages and CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 6 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi pecuniary loss amounting to Rs.6,32,796/- which is equivalent to 6 months basic pay last drawn in service of plaintiff in terms of declaration Ex. PW-1/3 is concerned . However, this court finds that the claims regarding damages @ Rs.10 lakhs, plaintiff did not lead any cogent evidence except self-serving deposition. Plaintiff did not examine any other witness who could have thrown light upon the quantum of damages and pecuniary loss suffered by plaintiff. Plaintiff did not even explain as to how it quantified the damages @ Rs.10 lakhs. Therefore, this Court is of the view that plaintiff is not entitled to the relief of recovery of damages of Rs.10 Lacs. Further, plaintiff also did not lead any evidence regarding the claim of interest @ 24% per annum on the suit amount. However, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if plaintiff is awarded pendent lite and future interest @ 12% per annum on the amount of Rs.6,32,796/-.
13. The suit of plaintiff is found filed within limitation period. This court has territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit. Hence, it is held that plaintiff successfully discharged the onus to prove its case to the extent of recovery of damages for a sum of Rs.6,32,796/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 12 % per annum and relief of permanent and mandatory injunctions as claimed in the plaint and is therefore entitled to the aforesaid reliefs.
RELIEF :
14. The suit of plaintiff is decreed against defendant in CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 7 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi the following terms :-
14.1) Defendant shall pay plaintiff a sum of Rs.6,32,796/-
(Rs. Six Lacs Thirty-Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety- Six only) along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 12 % per annum.
14.2) Defendant shall not divulge and disclose any further confidential information of plaintiff to any other entity; 14.3) Defendant shall also not carry on and / or solicit business from clients/customers/vendors of plaintiff by utilizing the list obtained from the database exclusively owned by plaintiff.
14.4) Defendant shall also pay to plaintiff cost of the suit .
15. Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly.
16. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.
Announced in the open (MONA TARDI KERKETTA) Court on this day of Addl. District Judge(SE)-06 9th October, 2023 Saket Courts, New Delhi CS DJ No.775/2021 Page 8 of 8 ADJ-06/SE/Saket/Delhi