Final Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 1
of 9
IN THE COURT OF MS. MANSI MALIK, JSCC-CUM- ASCJ-
CUM-GUARDIAN JUDGE, NORTH WEST, ROHINI
COURTS/DELHI
CNR No. DLNW030006702025
CS SCJ No. 472/25
Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya
S/o Sh. Manohar Lal
R/o 5-Z New Officer Colony,
Abohar Road, Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan-335001 ...Plaintiff
VERSUS
Getkart Private Limited
Having its registered
office at: 5, 8th floor
Pearl Omaxe, Netaji Subhash Place
New Delhi-110034
Through its Director/A.R
Sh. Gurmukh Singh ….Defendant
Date of Institution : 29.04.2025
Judgment reserved on : 09.09.2026
Judgment pronounced on : 17.09.2026
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff through the present suit has sought recovery
of money by way of decree for a sum of Rs. 2,13,310/-
against the defendant along with pendente lite and future
-- 1 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 2
of 9
interest of 24% per annum on the decreetal amount
alongwith cost and litigation expenses.
2. Brief facts as alleged in the plaint and documents filed by
the plaintiff are that the Defendant Company is an E-
commerce Service Company dealing in various kinds of
products on E-Commerce Platform through internet. The
plaintiff had joined the Defendant Company in 2022 vide
appointment letter dated 20.01.2022 as a "FULL STACK
DEVELOPER with a salary of Rs. 50,000/-. The plaintiff
had applied for the job in the defendant company and was
shortlisted after having an interview and joined the
Defendant Company in the month of January 2022 and
during the employment, the plaintiff created, designed and
managed the website of the Defendant Company, with a
team of about 4-5 persons and during the employment, the
plaintiff had performed all his duties and works assigned to
him with full dedication. The plaintiff received an
increment from the Defendant Company in September
2022 and started getting the salary of Rs. 62,500/- and
again received an increment from September 2023 and was
getting the salary of Rs. 1,13,350/-. From the joining the
job in the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company
regularly paid the salary to the plaintiff and has regularly
deposited the Provident Fund in the Plaintiff's PF Account
as well but in the month of July 2024 the Defendant
Company started creating issues against the plaintiff but
the plaintiff being an ideal employee, continued to work.
In the mid of the August 2024, the Defendant Company
-- 2 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 3
of 9
deposited the salary (for the month of July 2024) of the
plaintiff after so many requests made by the plaintiff from
the concerned department. It is further averred that in the
starting of August 2024, the Defendant Company started to
create a negative, depressed and anti social environment
for the plaintiff and by that act of the Defendant Company
it was not possible for the plaintiff to continue the job in
the defendant company. The plaintiff had no option left
except to leave the job and the plaintiff under the
compulsion from the Defendant Company left the job, and
signed the relieving letter. At the time of leaving the job
and signing the relieving letter, the defendant company
assured the plaintiff that the defendant company will clear
all the dues regarding the salary and PF of the plaintiff in
45 days from the date of the relieving letter. After the
expiration of the said 45 days, the plaintiff demanded his
salary and PF amount from the concerned department of
the Defendant Company but there was no response from
the Defendant Company. The plaintiff wrote various E-
mails to the HR Department of defendant company
regarding the outstanding salary of the plaintiff but all
efforts made by the plaintiff were in vain. The Defendant
Company withheld the salary of Rs. 1,13,350/- for the
month of August 2024 of the plaintiff without any reason.
The defendant company did not serve any notice period to
the plaintiff and the plaintiff had no option left except to
leave the job and search for a new job. The plaintiff got the
new job in the month of December 2024 and from August
2024 to December 2024 the plaintiff had no job and gone
-- 3 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 4
of 9
through the very hard time as from the financial aspect.
The Defendant Company also deducted the amount of PF
from the salary of the plaintiff from December 2023 to
June 2024 but did not deposit the Provident Fund (PF)
amount in the PF account of the plaintiff from December
2023 to June 2024 amounting to Rs.99,960/-. The
Defendant Company had not deposited the TDS of the
plaintiff to the concern department for the assessment
years of 2024-2025. The Plaintiff had made all the possible
efforts to recover the salary and amount of PF from the
Defendant Company. The plaintiff had tried several times
to get in contact with the Defendant Company through
mobile calls, via whatsapp and E-mail but all the time the
request made by the plaintiff was ignored by the defendant
company and there was no response from the defendant
side. The plaintiff had also register his grievances on
SAMADHAN PORTAL and also registered a grievance on
the EPFO portal but there was no satisfactory response
from that side too. The Defendant thus legally liable to
pay the outstanding amount of salary for the month of
August 2024 i.e. Rs.1,13,350/- and Provident Fund from
December 2023 to June 2024 of Rs. 99,960/-, total Rs.
2,13,310/- to plaintiff and is also liable to pay interest @
24% per annum on the said amount. Given such a scenario,
the present suit came to be filed wherein which the
following reliefs were sought:
a) Pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff and against the
Defendant for a sum of Rs. 2,13,310/- along with costs and
-- 4 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 5
of 9
pendentelite and future interest @24% per annum till
realization.
b) Award the damages and cost of litigation may also be
awarded in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendant.
3. The defendant was served on 22.05.2025. Despite the
same, he never appeared in Court and vide order dated
23.08.2025, his right to file WS was closed and he was
proceeded ex-parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff was examined as
PW-1 and he tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.
PW1/A. He also relied upon documents being:-
1. Aadhar Card of the plaintiff is Ex. PW-1/1(OSR).
2. Copy of Appointment Letter is Ex. PW-1/2(OSR)(Running
into pg. no. 16 to 18).
3. Copy of the increment letter dated 24.08.2023 is Ex. PW-
1/3.
4. Copy of salary slips is Ex. PW-1 / 4(Colly)(Running into
pg. no. 20 to 26).
5. Copy of the relieving letter dated 02.09.2024 is Ex. PW-1 /
5.
6. Copy of the conversation over the E-mail with the HR
Department is Ex. PW-1/6(Colly)(Running into pg. no. 28
to 32).
7. Copy of Bank Statement of the plaintiff is Ex. PW
-1/7(Colly)(Running into pg. no. 33 to 55).
-- 5 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 6
of 9
8. Statement of PF account of the plaintiff is Ex. PW-
1/8(Colly)(Running into pg. no. 56 to 59).
9. Copy of the FORM 26AS of the plaintiff is Ex. PW-
1/9(Running into pg. no. 60 to 63).
10.Copy of the response from SAMADHAN Portal is Ex.
PW-1/10(Colly)(Running into pg. no. 64 to 66).
11.EPFO grievance status is Ex. PW-1/11.
12.Certificate u/s 63(4)(c) of the Bhartiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, 2023 is Ex. PW-1/12.
5. Thereafter, PE was closed on 02.12.2025 and the matter
was listed for final arguments after PE. Final arguments
were then addressed by counsel for the plaintiff.
6. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.
2,13,310/- along with costs and pendentelite and future
interest @24% per annum till realization. The suit has been
filed within limitation period and this Court has
jurisdiction to decide the present case as per valuation.
7. The plaintiff has filed the Appointment Letter i.e. Ex.
PW-1/2 (OSR) which establishes that the plaintiff was
appointed by the defendant company and working as an
employee therein on an initial gross salary of Rs. 50,000/-
per month and an annual income of Rs. 6,00,000/-.
Thereafter, he was provided an increment vide increment
letter dated 24.08.2023 i.e. Ex. PW- 1/3 as per which his
annual salary was Rs. 13,60,200/-. Copy of salary slips i.e.
Ex. PW-1/4 (colly) have also been placed on record as per
-- 6 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 7
of 9
which the last salary drawn by the plaintiff was in July,
2024 amounting to Rs. 1,03,600/- as net pay after
deduction of TDS. The plaintiff has also placed on record
the relieving letter dated 02.09.2024 i.e. Ex. PW-1/5,
wherein it is stated that the resignation of the plaintiff has
been accepted and that the plaintiff worked from
18.01.2022 to 31.08.2024. Thereby, establishing that the
plaintiff worked with the defendant company in the month
of August, 2024. The plaintiff has also placed on record
his bank account statement as Ex. PW-1/7(colly) to
corroborate his averments that no salary for the month of
August, 2024 was received by him.
8. The plaintiff has also averred that the plaintiff has not
deposited the PF amount in the account of the plaintiff
from December, 2023 to June, 2024 amounting to Rs.
99,960/-. The plaintiff has also annexed the statement of
his PF account to corroborate the same which is Ex.
PW-1/8(colly). It is also stated that the defendant has also
not deposited the TDS of the plaintiff to the concerned
department as applicable by law and the copy of the form
26AS of the plaintiff depicting the same is Ex.
PW-1/9(colly). Copy of the e-mails i.e. communication
between between the plaintiff and the defendant i.e. Ex.
PW-1/3 and Ex. PW1/7 (Colly) has also been placed on
record to further corroborate his case. Neither the witness
was cross-examined nor any other evidence was led on
behalf of the defendant. Hence, this court has no reason to
disbelieve the assertions of the plaintiff, which leads to a
-- 7 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 8
of 9
necessary inference that defendant company has failed to
make the payment due to the plaintiff i.e. salary for the
month of August, 2024 i.e. 1,03,600/- after deduction of
the TDS amount along with the amount to be deposited in
the PF account of the plaintiff amounting to Rs. 99,960/-
from December, 2023 to June, 2024.
9. The plaintiff has also prayed for damages but the same
have not been quantified and no evidence has been led on
this aspect. Therefore, the Court is not inclined to grant
any damages to the plaintiff.
10. The plaintiff has also sought pendente lite and future
interest at the rate of 24% per annum. However, having
regard to the prevailing bank rates, ends of justice would
be met if the plaintiff is awarded pendente lite interest at
the rate of 9% per annum from the date of institution of the
suit till the date of decree and future interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of decree till realization.
11. In view of the above discussion, therefore, the suit of the
plaintiff is decreed. The plaintiff is awarded decree for
recovery of Rs. 2,03,560/- alongwith @ 9% interest per
annum on the aforesaid amount from the date of filing of
the present suit till the date of realization of the amount
decreed. The plaintiff is further awarded cost of suit.
-- 8 of 9 --
CS SCJ 472/25 Sukhdev Kumar Duhariya Vs. Getkart Pvt Ltd Pg. No. 9
of 9
12. Decree sheet shall be prepared accordingly subject to
payment of deficient court fee for the suit interest awarded
vide the present judgment.
13. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in the open
Court on 17.09.2026.
(Mansi Malik)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian-Judge
North West/Rohini Courts/Delhi
-- 9 of 9 --