A Bengaluru city civil court has restrained a senior employee of a software company from interfering with the firm's operations and from joining another organisation without completing exit formalities. The dispute, which began with a resignation over health concerns, turned into a legal battle over exit norms at the tech firm in Marathahalli.
Background of the Case
The case involves a software company based in Kundalahalli Gate and its 30-year-old employee, referred to as Srijesh P (name changed), from Uttarahalli. Srijesh had been working for the company since 2012 and was designated as director of technology in 2021. According to court records, he sent an email on January 14, 2021, resigning from his position, citing family problems and medical issues.
Company's Allegations
The company contended that as a senior-level employee, Srijesh was governed by its HR policy, which required a two-year notice period and completion of exit formalities, including handover of responsibilities, knowledge transfer, and signing of exit documents. The firm alleged that Srijesh did not comply and failed to complete these formalities. It further claimed that he attempted to leave without serving the notice period and sought to join another company. The company issued a legal notice on April 16, 2021, demanding he serve the notice period or pay approximately Rs 46.8 lakh as compensation. Subsequently, it filed a civil suit on April 19, 2021, seeking a permanent injunction to restrain him from interfering with its business and from joining another company without complying with exit norms.
Employee's Defence
In his defence, Srijesh admitted he had been employed since 2012 and resigned on January 14, 2021. However, he denied being bound by any HR policy requiring a two-year notice period. He argued that his appointment letter dated April 24, 2012, stipulated that either party could terminate employment by giving two months' notice, and he had not agreed to any additional conditions. He stated he worked sincerely throughout his tenure and that work pressure led to health issues, including back pain, high blood pressure, and diabetes, prompting his resignation. He also denied allegations of misconduct and interference and contested the company's claims regarding non-compliance with exit obligations.
Court's Observations and Order
After reviewing documents and hearing both sides, the court observed that the company failed to prove the employee was liable to give a two-year notice period. However, it found that the company had established that the employee could not join another company without complying with exit formalities as per its HR policy. The court also noted that the employee had not produced sufficient evidence to disprove the company's records or substantiate his claims to the required extent.
On March 23, the XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Court restrained Srijesh, his agents, or any person claiming through him from interfering with the company's officials in carrying out their duties or causing any disturbance to its business. The court further restrained him from joining any other company without complying with the exit formalities.
