IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on :-18.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement:-20.02.2026 Uploaded on:-20.2.2026 Artevis Consulting Pvt. Ltd. and Others … Petitioners Versus Preferred Square Analytic Pvt. Ltd. and Another ... Respondents ****

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Argued by :-

Mr. Vikas Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioners.

****

VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J .

1. The present Civil Revision Petition has been instituted by the petitioners invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read in conjunction with Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”). By way of the instant petition, the petitioners lay challenge to the order dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Civil Judge, Gurugram, whereby the application preferred by the petitioners under Order VII Rule

11 CPC came to be dismissed.

2. Briefly stated, respondent No.1–plaintiff, along with the proforma respondents, instituted a suit seeking a decree of mandatory ₹

injunction and recovery of damages quantified at 30 lakhs. Defendant Nos.2 and 4 in the main suit were employees of the plaintiff–company, and the action was founded upon alleged breaches of the terms and conditions embodied in their respective employment agreements, including, inter alia, the non-solicitation clause, non-disclosure clause, and the Non-

Disclosure Agreement.

2.1. Petitioner No.1 is a duly incorporated company engaged in offshore consultancy services, having its registered office at Delhi. Defendant No.2, who is the founding Director and promoter of petitioner No.1–company, was formerly employed with the plaintiff–company as a Senior Consultant and was subsequently elevated to the position of Principal Consultant. His employment was governed by an employment contract dated 04.04.2023, along with a Non-Disclosure Agreement of even date. Petitioner No.3/defendant No.3, the wife of defendant No.2, is also a founding Director and promoter of petitioner No.1–company. Respondent No.2/defendant No.4, a former employee of the plaintiff– company, was later inducted as a Director in petitioner No.1–company. Defendant No.4 had been promoted as Senior Consultant in plaintiff company with effect from 01.04.2022 and was similarly governed by an employment contract dated 04.04.2023 and a Non-Disclosure Agreement of the same date.

2.3. It is alleged that defendant No.2, in the course of his employment, was granted access to confidential and proprietary information of the plaintiff–company in good faith. Upon conducting a random search on LinkedIn, the plaintiff purportedly discovered that defendant No.2, in association with his wife, had established petitioner No.1–company, which is engaged in a competing line of business. It is further alleged that defendant No.4 breached the contractual stipulations by soliciting clients of the plaintiff–company for the benefit of petitioner No.1–company, while consciously concealing his association therewith and misusing his position to access confidential data.

2.4. On 07.01.2024, pursuant to a security audit of the laptop returned by defendant No.4, it was allegedly revealed that he had misappropriated confidential and proprietary information, as well as other resources of the plaintiff–company, for projects of petitioner No.1– company, in collusion with defendant No.2, as detailed in sub-para 14(r) of the plaint. It is further averred that defendant No.4 misused access to a premium ChatGPT account assigned by the plaintiff–company, allegedly uploading a client file to the said platform, downloading the same onto his personal system, and thereafter deleting the chat history. The said file, according to the plaintiff, was the cumulative outcome of contributions made by more than ten employees and pertained to a prominent real estate developer in Saudi Arabia, constituting a significant component of the plaintiff’s portfolio, with average mo