MS SARITA SINGH versus M/S SHREE INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED

MS SARITA SINGH versus M/S SHREE INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED

The Supreme Court held that the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proving that the appellant was sent on 'deputation'; deputation involves a tripartite consensual arrangement and specific rights and obligations and a transient business visit without written agreement does not qualify as deputation; accordingly the High Court judgment was set aside and the suit for recovery was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Ms Sarita Singh; Respondent: M/s Shree Infosoft Private Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned judgment of the High Court set aside; suit for recovery dismissed.
Legal Topics
Deputation, Interpretation of Employment Terms, Recovery of Expenses, Burden of Proof, Costs
Service Law Employment Law Contract Law Deputation Interpretation of Employment Terms Recovery of Expenses Burden of Proof Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Sarita Singh

Appellant

M/s Shree Infosoft Private Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was sent on 'deputation' within the meaning of clause II(5) of the employment offer
  2. 2 Whether a transient business visit without written deputation terms can be treated as an overseas deputation attracting repayment obligations
  3. 3 Which party bears the burden of proof to establish that deputation occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proving that the appellant was sent on 'deputation'; deputation involves a tripartite consensual arrangement and specific rights and obligations and a transient business visit without written agreement does not qualify as deputation; accordingly the High Court judgment was set aside and the suit for recovery was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment of the High Court set aside; suit for recovery dismissed.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 1 August 2018 in RSA No. 3369 of 2018 set aside
  • Suit for recovery instituted by the respondent dismissed