J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

CM APPL. 71003/2024 (delay of 132days in filing the appeal)

1. This application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 132 days in filing the Appeal.

2. For the reasons stated in the Application, the delay of 132 days in filing the Appeal, is condoned.

3. The Application is disposed of, accordingly.

CM APPL. 71006/2024 (delay 18 days in re-filing appeal)

4. This Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 18 days in re-filing the Appeal.

5. For the reasons stated in the Application, the delay of 18 days in re-filing the Appeal, is condoned.

6. The said Application is disposed of, accordingly.

RFA 847/2024:

7. The Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) has been preferred by the Appellant challenging the Order dated 08.02.2024, of the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, whereby the Suit of the Appellant seeking damages for defamation, was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(a) of the CPC, as not disclosing any cause of action.

8. A Civil Suit bearing CS No. 950/2023, was filed by the plaintiff/Appellant, seeking damages in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-, on account of defamation.

9. Briefly stated, the averments made in the Suit were that the Appellant/Plaintiff, Rohan Book Company Pvt. Ltd., is a Company engaged in the business of publication and distribution of books across Delhi and other parts of the country. The Respondent/Defendant was issued an

Appointment letter dated 16.08.2019 for the post of Zonal Sales Manager, which was accepted by the Respondent on 06.09.2019. The Respondent also executed a Non-Disclosure Agreement, Non-Compete Agreement, Non-Solicitation Agreement and an Employment Bond dated 16.08.2019, in favour of the Appellant Company.

10. Under the terms of Appointment the responsibilities of the Respondent included developing and maintaining relationships with schools within his assigned zone and reporting to the Accounts Department regarding monies received from such clients. He was placed on Probation and his employment was never confirmed.

11. According to the Appellant, during the course of his employment, the Respondent began neglecting his duties and failed to comply with various obligations stipulated in the Appointment Letter, including submission of weekly work Reports and adherence to the Company’s protocols. Complaints were also allegedly received by the Management regarding instances of misbehaviour by the Respondent with female employees.

12. In March, 2020, due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Appellant’s business operations were severely affected. Consequently, by Letter dated 11.05.2020, the Appellant informed its employees including the Respondent, that their salaries would be temporarily reduced. The Respondent acknowledged the same and continued to work, under the revised salary structure.

13. On 28.11.2020, the Plaintiff came to know, that the Respondent/Defendant had met representatives of competing Companies, including Next Education India Pvt. Ltd. and Orange Education, and had disclosed confidential information relating to the Appellant’s clientele and

business practices.

14. Upon receiving this information, the Appellant convened a Meeting with the Respondent on 01.12.2020, during which he was confronted with the allegations regarding disclosure of confidential information and his declining work performance.

15. On 02.12.2020, the Respondent addressed an email to the Management of the Plaintiff and was also marked to Nitin, an employee of the Appellant, seeking clearance of his alleged pending salary and travelling allowances with effect from 01.03.2020, stating that he was facing financial difficulties and would be able to perform his official responsibilities effectively, only after receipt of the outstanding dues. The Respondent also referred to the difficulties caused during the COVID-19 pandemic and expressed grievance regarding the ma