Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Miczo kft and MPW Workforce Private Limited, are seeking compensation from the defendant, Dhaneesh Yasodharan, for breach of an employment undertaking. The defendant was employed by the plaintiffs but absconded and took up another job in violation of the agreement.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant shall pay Rs. 8,25,715/- along with interest at specified rates.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed that the defendant must pay the plaintiffs a total of Rs. 8,25,715/- along with interest, for breaching the employment agreement. The defendant's assets are also liable to satisfy the decree.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established a case supported by evidence showing that the defendant breached the terms of the employment undertaking.
The plaintiffs established a case supported by evidence showing that the defendant breached the terms of the employment undertaking.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs established a case supported by evidence showing that the defendant breached the terms of the employment undertaking.
The plaintiffs established a case supported by evidence showing that the defendant breached the terms of the employment undertaking.
Supporting Evidence
I am of the view that plaintiffs have established a case and they are entitled to realize an amount of Rs.8,25,715/- with interest from defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed as follows: 1) Defendant shall pay Rs.8,25,715/- (Rupees Eight lakhs twenty five thousand seven hundred and fifteen only) along with interest @12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and 6% from the date of decree till payment or realization.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Miczo kft
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- MPW Workforce Private Limited
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Dhaneesh Yasodharan
- Party Age
- 36
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Power of Attorney, Undertaking executed by the defendant, Copy of Air tickets, Copy of work visa and residence permit, Returned registered cover with AD, Copy of lawyer notice
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Vipin V Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adarsh Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreelakshmi G
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Merline Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Celine John
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Mehnaz P Mohammed
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anirudh G Kamath
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs sought recovery of a compensation sum of Rs. 8,25,715/- due to the breach of contract by the defendant.
Evidence:
Defendant shall pay Rs.8,25,715/- (Rupees Eight lakhs twenty five thousand seven hundred and fifteen only) along with interest @12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and 6% from the date of decree till payment or realization, as the case may be, to plaintiffs.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to recover the costs incurred in the lawsuit.
Evidence:
Plaintiffs are also entitled to realize the costs of the suit.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the authority of the representative of the first plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Employment Undertaking
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document contains the terms agreed upon by the defendant in relation to his employment with the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Air Tickets
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides evidence of the travel arrangements made for the defendant by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Work Visa and Residence Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is essential for validating the employment and residency of the defendant in Hungary.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Returned Registered Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows the evidence of the legal notice sent to the defendant which was returned unclaimed.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the legal notice issued to the defendant regarding the breach of contract.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Miczo kft et al vs Dhaneesh Yasodharan regarding realization of money
Case Code Year
Case between Miczo kft et al vs Dhaneesh Yasodharan regarding realization of money