Delhi District Court
M/S Fiitjee Foundation For Education, ... vs Senthil Educational Trust on 23 November, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MS. PURVA SAREEN,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-01, SOUTH DISTRICT,
SAKET COURT, NEW DELHI
Civil Suit No.37/2021
DLST-01-000371-2021
FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training
Through its authorised representative
Having its registered office at
29A, Kalu Sarai, Sarvpriya Vihar,
New Delhi-110016
.... Plaintiffs
VERSUS
1. Senthil Educational Trust
Office at 27A,
Narasimmaachari Road (South),
Dharampuri Post, Chennai
2. Mr. K. Dhanasekar
Secretary, Senthil Educational Trust,
Office at 27A,
Narasimmaachari Road (South),
Dharampuri Post, Chennai
.... Defendants
Date of institution : 16.01.2021
Date of final arguments : 27.10.2023
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 23.11.2023
JUDGMENT
SUIT FOR PERMANENT AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION
1. The present suit has been filed by FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training through its authorized representative (hereinafter referred as plaintiff) for permanent and mandatory injunction against the defendants namely Senthil Educational Trust (hereinafter referred as defendant no.1) and (ii) Sh. K. Dhanasekar CS No.37/2021 Page 1 of 6 FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust (hereinafter referred as defendant no.2).
2. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant no.1 is running a school named as the Senthil Public School and defendant no.2 is Secretary of defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 entered into an agreement dated 24.03.2017 for giving management services. On the same day, defendant entered into an agreement with FIITJEE Ltd for holding integrated school programes. The arrangement between the plaintiff and defendants has been running smoothly for the past two years. The plaintiff alongwith FIITJEE has worked endlessly in order to implement the ideal school initiatives conceived by FFERT.
3. It is further averred that defendants had started raising the issue and started restricting, resisting and creating impediments in smooth functioning of the programe by FIITJEE Ltd and forbidding the employees from taking further admissions in said program and also removed the board showing FIITJEE Center, displayed within the premises of the school. The defendants also circulated letter dated 03.02.2020 to the parents regarding opening of an academy under the name of 'Senthil Coaching Academy' and published an advertisement to this effect. As per clause 3 on page 8 of the agreement dated 24.03.2017 "the school on its own or through any other coaching center will not run any other course preparing students for competitive exams at campus in Salem".
4. It is further averred that the defendants further stopped the ingress and egress of the employees of the plaintiff and they refused to make the payment as per agreement which is in contravention of clause 6 of the CS No.37/2021 Page 2 of 6 FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust agreement dated 24.03.2017. On 06.01.2020, defendant no.2 refused to release quarter bill payment of Rs.19,85,586/- to the plaintiff despite the fact that plaintiff had performed its part of agreement. The total amount payable by the defendant stands at Rs.59,00,000/- and the invoices have been sent to the defendant. All the acts of the defendants are in total violation of the agreement entered into between the parties and despite all efforts of the plaintiff, defendants have refused to meet the representative of the plaintiff to discuss the matter and sort out the misunderstandings. The tenure of the agreement was 35 years and as per the agreement atleast four years prior notice was required if any of the party wished to terminate the agreement which was only to ensure that the students who had taken admission were left in a lurge and their future was not adversely effected.
5. The defendants on the other hand have been approaching the faculty of the plaintiff to leave the employment of the plaintiff and to join the defendant. After extracting the no how regarding the functioning of the institution and the curriculum the defendants are now trying to terminate the said agreement in violation of its terms. It has also come to the knowledge of the plaintiff that the defendants are harassing the students by threatening to revoke their admissions in the school and also giving them threat that they would not permit them to appear in CBSE board exams. The defendants are acting totally in contravention of the agreement which states that the defendants shall not run any other coaching course from the premises of the school. The act of the defendants are causing fear and anxiety among the students and their parents. The plaintiffs have a valid right as per the agreement to continue holding classes at the premises and the act of the defendants CS No.37/2021 Page 3 of 6 FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust is causing undue harassment and loss to the plaintiff. The defendants have willfully breached the contract. Hence, the present suit was filed.
6. Defendants made appearance through their counsel before the court. However, no written statement was filed on behalf of defendants. Thereafter, none had appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 17.01.2023.
7. Thereafter, matter was listed for ex-parte plaintiff evidence. During the ex-parte plaintiff evidence, plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and tendered his affidavit in evidence as Ex.PW1/X. He relied upon the following documents :-
1) Board Resolution, Ex.PW1/A (OSR).
2) Management service agreement, Ex.PW1/B (OSR) (colly).
3) Integrated School Programe agreement, Ex.PW1/C (OSR).
4) Letter dated 08.03.2020, Ex.PW1/D (OSR).
5) Letter dated 08.03.2020, Mark 1/E.
6) Invoice, Ex.PW1/F (OSR).
7) Letter dated 15.01.2020, Mark 1/G.
8) Copy of advertisement in newspaper, Ex.PW1/H (OSR).
9) Integrated entrance coaching circular, Mark 1/I.
8. No other witness was examined by plaintiff in support of his case and plaintiff's evidence was closed. Final arguments were addressed by the counsel for plaintiff.
9. During trial, counsel for defendants appeared. However, no application for setting aside the ex-parte order was filed despite giving CS No.37/2021 Page 4 of 6 FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust several opportunities. Hence, no further opportunity was granted to file the application for setting aside the ex-parte order and matter was listed for final arguments.
10. Final arguments were addressed by both the parties.
11. It has been argued by learned counsel for plaintiff that plaintiff in the present suit as prayed for permanent and mandatory injunction under Section 38 of Specific Relief Act and in order to substantiate its claim, plaintiff has placed on record the relevant documents and proved the same by leading evidence. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled for the relief, as prayed.
12. Learned counsel for defendant has submitted that plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands and not entitled for any relief from this court.
13. The defendants have been proceeded ex-parte in this matter. The oral as well as documentary evidence led by the plaintiff remains uncontroverted and unchallenged. Defendants have neither led any evidence nor placed on record a single document to prove its version. The court finds no ground to disbelieve the testimony of plaintiff's witnesses. Documentary evidence led by plaintiff's witness deserves to be accepted on its face value. The Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff has been able to prove the case as set up in the plaint and the plaintiff is entitled for reliefs, as prayed for.
14. In view aforesaid discussions, suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff CS No.37/2021 Page 5 of 6 FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust and against the defendants. The defendants or their agents etc are hereby restrained from stopping ingress or egress of the faculty, students and other staff of the plaintiff from the demised premises.
15. Defendants are further directed to allow the plaintiff to hold the coaching classes in the premises of the defendants and defendants are directed not to approach the faculty, staff and student of the plaintiff, in order to lure them to take up employment with the defendants in the proposed coaching centre.
16. The defendants are further directed to allow the plaintiff to enroll students for the current and future coaching by the plaintiff in accordance with agreement.
17. Defendants are further restrained to rescind the contract other than with due process of law and also in accordance with the agreement dated 24.03.2017.
18. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. The present decree is passed subject to filing of deficient court fees, if any.
19. No order as to cost.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Purva Digitally signed
by Purva Sareen
Sareen Date: 2023.11.24
11:54:45 +0530
Announced in open court (Purva Sareen)
On 23rd November , 2023 Additional District Judge-01,
(South) Saket District Courts,
New Delhi
CS No.37/2021 Page 6 of 6
FIITJEE Foundation for Education, Research and Training Vs Senthil Educational Trust