HERSHEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read with Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') against the order dtd. 19/7/2023 in C.S. No. 1019/2017 passed by learned Additional District Judge-09, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court') whereby application under Order XVI Rule 1 and 2 CPC filed by the petitioner/defendant praying for recall of the summons of witnesses for 19/7/2023 was dismissed.

(2.) The facts reveal that the petitioner, M/s Hershey India Private Limited is a subsidiary of M/s Hershey Company, USA, which came into existence as per the joint venture of Godrej group with Hershey Company named as Godrej Hershey Food and Beverages Limited in the year 2007. The Godrej Hershey Food and Beverages Limited had acquired Nutrine Confectionary Company Pvt. Ltd. in the year 2006 as a part of its business arrangement. The Godrej group completely exited the venture in the year 2012 and the petitioner company's name changed to M/s Hershey India Pvt. Ltd.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that on 27/5/2006, respondent was appointed at the post of Regional Sales Manager by Nutrine Confectionary Company Pvt. Ltd. However, his employment continued with the respondent on executing the contract of appointment dtd. 17/8/2007 for the post of Area Sales Manager in the petitioner company. The petitioner company terminated the employment of the respondent vide termination letter dtd. 2/11/2016 alleging misconduct in his dealings with the distributors of the petitioner company. During the course of employment, the petitioner company found that there were various irregularities committed by the respondent, which led to thorough investigation by the petitioner company with respect to alleged misconduct. As per, the investigation report dtd. 2/11/2016, the committee constituted by the petitioner company concluded that the respondent had committed serious breach of code of ethical business conduct and applicable employees regulation and such misconduct rendered him liable for termination of his employment contract.