I have searched this forum and noted views that foreign "service bond" requiring employees to serve for a minimum number of years after coming back to India without any expenses on training are not valid.
It seems TCS had filed some cases in court as per information given below by TCS in prospectus for public issue.
Can anyone cite a court judgment on any decided case on this issue, please?
I read an article referring to six judgments as follows but could not find the judgments by searching on Google: Can someone provide a link to these judgments, please?
1. Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Das, AIR 1963 SC 1405
2. George Pictures Ltd. v. Neelakandaru Gopalakrishna, AIR 1971 Ker 271
3. Narasimha Rao v. Supdt. of Excise, AIR 1974 AP. 157, 167
4. P. Nagarajan v. Southern Structurals Ltd., 1996 (2) LLN 810
5. Fertiliser and Chemical Travancore Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar and others, 1990 LLR 711
6. Toshnial Brothers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. E. Eswarprasad & Ors., 1997 LLR 500
It has been stated in the article that the bond is valid contrary to views being expressed by the moderator and many other experts.
In Toshnial Brothers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. E. Eswarprasad & Ors., 1997 LLR 500 decided by the Madras High Court. In this case, an employee who was engaged as a Sales Engineer committed a breach of the undertaking when he left the services of the plaintiff after serving for 14 months only as against the contracted period of three years. When the case reached the High Court, the High Court of Madras held that in such a case, it becomes unnecessary for the employer to prove separately any post-breach damages. On the other hand, it would suffice to substantiate the fact that the concerned employee was the beneficiary of special favor or concession or training at the cost and expense wholly or in part of the employer and there had been a breach of the undertaking by the beneficiary of the same. In such cases, the breach would per se constitute the required legal injury resulting to the employer, out of the breach or violation by the employees. The High Court also clarified that while awarding damages as stipulated, the statutory exception for mitigating the quantum of damages will have no bearing.
Attrition Suits: The TCS Division enters into Service Agreements with its employees at the time they join the TCS Division. In the event that the employee leaves before serving the minimum period specified in the Service Agreement, the TCS Division proceeds against the surety mentioned in such agreement for payment of liquidated damages. Additionally, in instances where the employee has been sent out of India to work on a project, the employee has to enter into an Overseas Deputation Agreement with the TCS Division. In terms of this agreement, the employee has to return to India after the completion of the overseas deputation, provided the deputation was in excess of 30 days and work with the TCS Division in India for a minimum period of six months.
The table below summarizes the position in relation to the number of ex-employees against whom the TCS Division has initiated action in a court of law.
S. No. Centre Number of cases where the matter is pending with the court Amount of claim
1. Bombay 09 450,000
2. Kolkata 28 1,400,000
3. Chennai 24 1,200,000
4. Bangalore 200 10,000,000
5. Hyderabad 14 700,000
Total 275 13,750,000
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
It seems TCS had filed some cases in court as per information given below by TCS in prospectus for public issue.
Can anyone cite a court judgment on any decided case on this issue, please?
I read an article referring to six judgments as follows but could not find the judgments by searching on Google: Can someone provide a link to these judgments, please?
1. Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Das, AIR 1963 SC 1405
2. George Pictures Ltd. v. Neelakandaru Gopalakrishna, AIR 1971 Ker 271
3. Narasimha Rao v. Supdt. of Excise, AIR 1974 AP. 157, 167
4. P. Nagarajan v. Southern Structurals Ltd., 1996 (2) LLN 810
5. Fertiliser and Chemical Travancore Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar and others, 1990 LLR 711
6. Toshnial Brothers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. E. Eswarprasad & Ors., 1997 LLR 500
It has been stated in the article that the bond is valid contrary to views being expressed by the moderator and many other experts.
In Toshnial Brothers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. E. Eswarprasad & Ors., 1997 LLR 500 decided by the Madras High Court. In this case, an employee who was engaged as a Sales Engineer committed a breach of the undertaking when he left the services of the plaintiff after serving for 14 months only as against the contracted period of three years. When the case reached the High Court, the High Court of Madras held that in such a case, it becomes unnecessary for the employer to prove separately any post-breach damages. On the other hand, it would suffice to substantiate the fact that the concerned employee was the beneficiary of special favor or concession or training at the cost and expense wholly or in part of the employer and there had been a breach of the undertaking by the beneficiary of the same. In such cases, the breach would per se constitute the required legal injury resulting to the employer, out of the breach or violation by the employees. The High Court also clarified that while awarding damages as stipulated, the statutory exception for mitigating the quantum of damages will have no bearing.
Attrition Suits: The TCS Division enters into Service Agreements with its employees at the time they join the TCS Division. In the event that the employee leaves before serving the minimum period specified in the Service Agreement, the TCS Division proceeds against the surety mentioned in such agreement for payment of liquidated damages. Additionally, in instances where the employee has been sent out of India to work on a project, the employee has to enter into an Overseas Deputation Agreement with the TCS Division. In terms of this agreement, the employee has to return to India after the completion of the overseas deputation, provided the deputation was in excess of 30 days and work with the TCS Division in India for a minimum period of six months.
The table below summarizes the position in relation to the number of ex-employees against whom the TCS Division has initiated action in a court of law.
S. No. Centre Number of cases where the matter is pending with the court Amount of claim
1. Bombay 09 450,000
2. Kolkata 28 1,400,000
3. Chennai 24 1,200,000
4. Bangalore 200 10,000,000
5. Hyderabad 14 700,000
Total 275 13,750,000
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Goyalvimal,
As you have already searched on Google, it may be a little difficult to find soft copies of these cases. There is an article on Indlaw that sheds light on your area of concern. I hope you have already reviewed it, but for my satisfaction and that of other friends, I am providing the link: [A brief note on breach of service agreements](http://indlaw.com) (Link updated to site home) ([Search on Cite](https://www.citehr.com/results.php?q=A brief note on breach of service agreements) | [Search on Google](https://www.google.com/search?q=A brief note on breach of service agreements)).
Friends, if anyone has access to Manupatra or any other legal search engine, please do the needful. Goyal, if you could share the site from where you found the TCS figures, it would be very helpful.
For more HR-related information, visit: [White Eagle](http://kuldeeprathore.blogspot.com/).
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
24As you have already searched on Google, it may be a little difficult to find soft copies of these cases. There is an article on Indlaw that sheds light on your area of concern. I hope you have already reviewed it, but for my satisfaction and that of other friends, I am providing the link: [A brief note on breach of service agreements](http://indlaw.com) (Link updated to site home) ([Search on Cite](https://www.citehr.com/results.php?q=A brief note on breach of service agreements) | [Search on Google](https://www.google.com/search?q=A brief note on breach of service agreements)).
Friends, if anyone has access to Manupatra or any other legal search engine, please do the needful. Goyal, if you could share the site from where you found the TCS figures, it would be very helpful.
For more HR-related information, visit: [White Eagle](http://kuldeeprathore.blogspot.com/).
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for your observations. I have read the said article. Cases cited above are from this link/article only. For TCS, I got the details from a Google search; it was contained in a Public/Right issue prospectus. The link is given below: http://www.sebi.gov.in/dp/tcspa.pdf
There is one Miss Tavlin Kaur on Ibibo where she said there is a Supreme Court ruling that no one can be forcefully employed against his will (ibibo Sawaal Expert Answers: what is the legality of service bonds <link updated to site home> (Search On Cite | Search On Google)) but she did not cite the said ruling to find out the applicability to individual cases.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is one Miss Tavlin Kaur on Ibibo where she said there is a Supreme Court ruling that no one can be forcefully employed against his will (ibibo Sawaal Expert Answers: what is the legality of service bonds <link updated to site home> (Search On Cite | Search On Google)) but she did not cite the said ruling to find out the applicability to individual cases.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
High Court Judgement on Breach of Bond and Quantum of Compensation.PD F