Quick Summary: The Delhi High Court made a decision on a case between ARM Digital Media and Ritesh Singh, focusing on breaking rules in an employment agreement. The court decided that the case should be handled by regular civil courts and not specialized business courts.
Background of the Case
On December 1, 2025, Judge Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav from the Delhi High Court gave a decision in the case of ARM Digital Media Pvt. Ltd. and others against Ritesh Singh. The case was about claims that Ritesh Singh, who used to be a Managing Director, broke rules in an employment agreement from September 8, 2016.
Allegations Against Ritesh Singh
ARM Digital Media accused Ritesh Singh of several things:
- Unauthorized Salary Increases: Singh supposedly raised his own salary without getting the right approval.
- Ignoring Rules: He didn't follow important legal and company rules.
- Joining a Competitor: After quitting on March 31, 2023, Singh went to work for a competitor, Insite Digital Private Limited, which supposedly broke the rules about not working for a competitor.
- Sharing Secrets: He was accused of giving away secret information and trying to get clients to leave.
- Causing Problems: Singh supposedly caused trouble in company meetings and complained to the Registrar of Companies.
Defendant's Arguments
Ritesh Singh's lawyer, Mr. Sitikanth Nayak, argued that:
- The case was a "business dispute" and should be handled by business courts, not regular courts.
- The employment agreement was connected to another business agreement, making it a business matter.
- The case couldn't proceed because they didn't follow the required steps to try and settle it before going to court.
Court's Analysis
Judge Kaurav looked into whether the dispute was a business or regular matter:
- Employment Contracts Not Business Matters: The court pointed out that job agreements don't count as "business disputes" according to the Business Courts Act.
- Handled by Regular Courts: The court decided that regular courts have the power to deal with job-related disputes, including breaking trust and sharing secrets.
Conclusion of the Judgment
The court refused the request to dismiss the case, allowing it to continue in regular court. The judge stated that the case was mainly about job responsibilities, not business deals.
"The case is mainly about job duties and related responsibilities, and should be handled as a regular civil case."
The case is set to continue on March 9, 2026, before the Joint Registrar.
