JUDGMENT:

This first Civil Appeal has been filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code (for short ‘C.P.C.’) by the unsuccessful defendant in OS.No.58 of 2012 on the file of III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court at Secunderabad, assailing the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 13-12-2017, where under, he was directed by the trial Court to pay an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- along with interest @ of 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decree and also to pay an amount of Rs.63,918/- towards three months salary payable by him to the respondent/plaintiff along with interest.

2. Before adverting to the merits of the appeal, as could be seen from the impugned judgment and other record would indicate that the respondent has filed the above referred original suit against the appellant herein for recovery of Rs.1,50,000/- as amount payable by the appellant herein and also an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages/loss caused to the respondent by the appellant. As per the averments made in the plaint, it appears that the respondent is a registered Private Limited Company which used to supply tool kits to Engineering Colleges. The appellant was employed in the respondent company from June 2009 as Head of Marketing Department. However, the respondent has alleged that the appellant herein all of a sudden resigned his job by sending E-mail on 18-05-2011 with a request to relieve him on or before 26-05-2011. The respondent has also claimed that as per the agreement, he has to serve the respondent for a minimum period of two years but due to his abrupt resignation, the respondent suffered loss to the tune of Rs.80,00,000/- and that he failed to reach his target of Rs.30,00,000/- turnover. While claiming that there was an outstanding amount of Rs.5,00,000/- payable by the appellant herein, a suit was filed by the respondent claiming an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages for his sudden resignation.

3. The appellant contested the suit by denying the liability to pay an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and he has also claimed that as per his joining report, the minimum period of employment was only one year and according to the standing orders of the respondent, three months notice is required in case of any resignation. Therefore, he was ready to pay three months salary because of the resignation filed by him and sought for dismissal of the suit. He has also claimed that the respondent itself was due to pay Rs.1,03,318/- therefore, sought for set off of the said amount and prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. The trial Court framed the following issues:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages?

3. To what relief?

5. During the trial, one B.Arun Kumar was examined as PW.1 by the respondent/plaintiff and through him Exs.A1 to A12 were marked. The appellant herein was examined as DW.1 and he has marked Exs.B1 to B5. The trial Court though did not accept the entire claim of the respondent and after holding that the appellant herein was unable to establish the liability of respondent for payment of Rs.1,03,318/- still passed a decree directing him to pay the amount as mentioned herein before and decreed the suit in part.

6. The appellant has filed the present appeal on various grounds and claimed that the trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence in a correct way. The documents marked as Ex.A2 i.e., bunch of photocopies of cash suspension slips cannot be accepted, thereby, the trial Court ought not to have passed a decree for payment of Rs.1,32,000/- based on Ex.A2. The respondent was unable to produce any bills in support of the said cash suspension slips. There was no reason in Ex.A2 as to why the amounts were paid to the appellant. He has also claimed that the respondent did not file any account statement in support of the claim, whereas, as per the documents filed by him through Exs.B3 to