The plaintiff's failure to provide specific details of the confidential information allegedly misused by the defendant No. 1 and the vagueness of the averments made by the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case for the grant of an interim injunction.

JUDGMENT :

Amit Bansal, J.

I.A. No. 7635/2021 (u/O-XIII R-1 of CPC)

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

I.A. No.10786/2021 (of the defendant No.1 for exemption from attestation of supporting affidavits and affidavit of service of counsel for the defendant no.1 through the oath commissioner), I.A. No.10787/2021 (of the defendant No.1 for exemption from filing certified copies, legible, typed copies of the annexures) & I.A. No.10788/2021 (of the defendant No.1 for exemption from filing official translation and typed copy of annexures/documents)

2. For the reasons stated in the applications, the same are allowed.

I.A. No.7634/2021 (u/O-XXXIX R-1 & 2 of CPC) & I.A. No.12977/2021 (for directions)

3. By the present order, I shall dispose of the applications filed on behalf of the plaintiff Company namely, I.A. No. 7634/2021 and I.A. No. 12977/2021.

4. I.A. No. 7634/2021 has been filed by the plaintiff Company under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking an ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from using, disclosing, disseminating, divulging, circulating, selling or transferring etc., in any manner, the proprietary sensitive and highly confidential information/data, including the intellectual property of the plaintiff Company. Though, prayer b in the aforesaid application was in respect of restraining the defendant No. 1 from competing with the plaintiff Company during the subsistence of the Share Purchase and Shareholders Agreement dated 24th December, 2012 and from disclosing, selling or transferring any confidential information, including intellectual property of the plaintiff Company to the defendant No. 2 or anyone else, including the competitors of the plaintiff Company, however, submissions have been made only in respect of disclosing confidential information.

5. The counsel for the defendant No. 1 appeared on advance notice on 5th July, 2021, when the suit along with I.A. No. 7634/2021 was first listed. Though no formal notice was issued in the aforesaid application, the counsel for the defendant No. 1 has been heard at length on all subsequent dates before this Court.

6. I.A. No. 12977/2021 has been filed by the plaintiff Company under Section 151 of the CPC, seeking a direction to the defendant No. 1 to transfer his 7,517 shares in favour of the plaintiff Company for a consideration of Rs. 12,21,512.50/-.

7. Notice was issued in I.A. No. 12977/2021 qua prayer (a) on 12th November, 2021. A reply has been filed to I.A. No. 12977/2021 by the defendant No. 1 and a rejoinder, thereto, has been filed by the plaintiff Company.

8. For the present applications to be decided, the necessary facts as pleaded by the plaintiff Company in the plaint are as follows:

(i) The plaintiff, Elcom Innovation Pvt. Ltd., is in the business of aerospace, communications, electronics, tactical communications, and homeland security, etc. and is a leader in the field of defence.

(ii) The defendant No. 1, Mr. Harish Sharma, is an erstwhile employee and shareholder of the plaintiff Company. The defendant No. 1 was appointed as a Director – Product Engineering w.e.f. 1st December, 2012. The defendant No. 1 was also a party to the Share Purchase and Shareholders Agreement dated 24th December, 2012 of the plaintiff Company (hereinafter, referred to as the “SPSA”), in pursuance whereto the defendant No. 1 was allotted 5.4% shareholding in the plaintiff Company.

(iii) The defendant No. 2, Vihaas Design Technologies, is an entity engaged in the same business as the plaintiff Company and is managed by the defendants No. 1 and 3.

(iv) Under the SPSA, the defendant No. 1 had unequivocally undertaken to maintain confidentiality and to not venture into anti-competitive practice to the detriment of the plaintiff Company during the course of his employment and for a period of three years from the date of severance from the plaintiff Company.

(v) The defendant No. 1 resigned from the plaintiff Company w.e.f. 10th April, 2018, purs