[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Calcutta High Court
Debanjan Datta vs Webcon Consulting (India) Limited on 19 March, 2026
Author: Sugato Majumdar
Bench: Sugato Majumdar
2026:CHC-OS:94
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Sugato Majumdar
CS/255/2022
DEBANJAN DATTA
VS
WEBCON CONSULTING (INDIA) LIMITED
For the Plaintiff : Mr. Rupak Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Jayanta Sengupta, Adv.
Mr. Saunak Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Auddy, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Goopta, Adv.
Mr. Arpan Laha, Adv.
Hearing concluded on : 10/03/2026
Judgment on : 19/03/2026
Sugato Majumdar, J.:
The instant suit was filed by the Plaintiff, praying for recovery of money on
account of unpaid salary along with other relief.
The Plaintiff was appointed as Managing Director of the Defendant company
in terms of the letter of appointment dated 13th July, 2011. The Defendant is a public
limited company.
Once the Plaintiff was appointed as the Managing Director, he took steps for
rejuvenating and revitalizing the financial health of the Defendant company. It was
Page |2
2026:CHC-OS:94
only after induction of the Plaintiff as Managing Director that the companies started
showing better result in terms of the revenue increase.
In order to facilitate and ease out the working capital constrains of the
Defendant company, the Plaintiff abstained from drawing a part of salary and
perquisites from the Defendant. In fact, the Defendant had also acknowledged such
gesture of the Plaintiff and had expressed gratitude by adopting several Board
resolutions recording that the Plaintiff had not withdrawn such salaries or
perquisites payable to the Plaintiff.
The salary of the Plaintiff was enhanced by Board resolutions. After
superannuation of the Plaintiff, more than one crore rupees remain outstanding and
payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff particulars of which are given herein below:
Sl. No. Particulars Amounts in Rupees
1. Outstanding Salary 9,00,000
2. Outstanding Perquisites 20,00,000
3. Leave Encashment 4,50,004
4. Gratuity 2,79,806
5. Interest @ 18% p.a. on and from 64,63,039
31/07/2016
Total Rs.1,00,92,835
It was also averred in the plaint that few staff of the Defendant uploaded,
tampered, false and fabricated minutes of meeting of the Defendant company on 22nd
September, 2014 which was in the web portal of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs on
21st November, 2014. The Plaintiff, therefore, filed the instant suit, praying for
Page |3
2026:CHC-OS:94
recovery of a sum of Rs.1,00,92,835/- damages of Rs.20,00,000/- along with other
prayers.
A writ of summons were served upon the Defendant but did not file written
statement for which the suit became undefended.
The Plaintiff adduced oral as well as documentary evidences including various
Board Resolutions, Appointment Letter which were marked as Ext.A to Ext. Q.
These documentary evidences as well as the oral evidences established the claim of
the Plaintiff.
Unchallenged testimony of the Plaintiff established and that the Plaintiff is
able to prove the claim and that the Plaintiff is entitled to the money decree as prayed
for in Prayer (a). However, this Court doesn't think it proper to allow the decree for
damages.
Let the suit be partly allowed and Plaintiff do get a decree for sum of
Rs.1,00,92,835/- with interest at a rate of 12% per annum. The interest shall be
payable from the date of institution of the suit till recovery. The Defendant shall pay
the decretal amount within three months from the date of drawing up of the decree.
In case of failure, the Defendant shall be liable to pay additional 3% penal interest
from the expiry of the said period on the principal and interest capitalized from that
date of the default.
Let the decree be drawn up.
The instant suit stands disposed of.
(Sugato Majumdar, J.)
