BEFORE HON ’BLE HIGH COURT OF J U DICATURE, D E LHI

ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION

FOR THE OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER:

S E CTION 43 OF THE I N FORMATION T E CHNOLOGY ACT , 2000 AND SECTION

73 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT , 187 2

IN THE MATTER O F :
DELHI D ISCOVERY HOSPITAL.................................................................................. PETITIONER
V.s

JJ D IAGNOSTICS........................................................................................................ RESPONDENT

M EMORANDOM F OR R ESPONDENT

Page | 1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENT Page
No.
Table of Contents 2

List of Abbreviations 3

Index of Authorities 4

Books

Journals

Statutes

Websites

Statement Of Jurisdiction 5

Statement of Facts 6

Issues Raised 8

Summary Of Arguments

Prayers

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

Page | 2
 LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

& AND
AIR All India Reporter
All. Allahabad
Art. Art.
Anr. Another

A.P. Andhra Pradesh

Corp. Corporation
Co. Company

Cl. Clause

Ed. Edition

Hon’ble Honorable

i.e. That is

Ltd. Limited

M/s Messrs

Ors. Others

Re: Reference

Sec. Section

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

SCR Supreme Court Reports

V. Versus

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

Page | 3
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

 Books
1. Durga Das Basu, Constitution Law of India (LexisNexis 2008)
2. J.N. Pandey, Constitution Law of India ( Central Law Agency 2018)
3. K D Gaur, Textbook on Indian Penal Code (LexisNexis 2018)
4. R.K Bangia Indian Contract Act (Allahabad Law Agency)
5. Dr. Sarla Gupta (Agarwal), Beniprasad Agarwal, Information Technology Law and
Practice ( Premeir Publishing Co., Allahabad)

 Journals

1. All India Reporter

2. Supreme Court Cases
3. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Researcher
4. National Law School of India Review

 Statues

1. The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908

2. The Companies Act, 2013
3. The Constitution Of India, 1960
4. The Indian Contract Act, 1872
5. The Information Technology Act, 2000

 Websites

1. https://www.blog.ipleaders.com
2. https://www.indiankanoon./
3. https://www.lawctopus.com/
4. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

Page | 4
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to try the instant matter under Article 226 of the
Constitution Of India, 1950

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Page | 5
1. That , In September 2002, Dr. JJ set up JJ Diagnostics Private Limited along with his
wife Stella, in Pune and started discussions with Terry Fox Foundation Cancer Center,
California to safely Beta -test tele -radiology services . Due to success of the project,
TFF Cancer Foundation signed a 5-year contract worth 10 million USD with JJ
Diagnostics.

2. That, JJ Diagnostics started seeking job-applications from qualified radiologists. The

candidates required a minimum qualification of a masters’ degree in radiology from any
reputed Indian Medical College. The advertisement stated that, a master’s degree from
a reputed U.S. or U.K. medical college was preferable, although not mandatory.

3. That, On February 2003, Dr. manjari as one of the qualified radiologist was hired by JJ
Diagnostics. As an employee, she had to comply with the terms of the contract of
employment.

4. That, On February 2004, Dr. Jacob received notice from a court in Moonvale, California
of a suit filed by the TFF Foundation against JJ Diagnostics seeking damages of US$
15 Million for breach of its confidentiality obligations by JJ Diagnostics under its contract
with the Terry Fox Foundation. The Terry Fox Foundation therefore had strong reason
to believe that the leak occurred at JJ Diagnostics end and hence brought about a suit
against the later for recovery of damages.

5. That, Dr. JJ conducted an internal probe headed by a retired judge of Patna High Court.
It directly linked the leakage of information to Dr. Majari, who later confessed that she
had passed on patient information to Dr. Ross whi was the owner of a pharmaceutical
company in US. It was not clear whether Dr. Manjari had received any monetary reward
or other benefits for providing this information.

6. That, Dr. Jacob offered Dr. Manjari that she could terminate her employment by giving 3
month's notice as required under her employment contract. Therefore, on the very
same day, Dr. Manjari submitted her resignation letter terminating her employment
effective 3 month's from the date of the letter.

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

7. That, On October 16, 2004, Dr. Manjari addressed a detailed email to Dr. Jacob which
highlighted instances of sexual harassment that she suffered in the company. She

Page | 6
 mentioned that her team member Dr. Jacob had the habit of rubbing shoulders with her
each time they were passing through the office corridors in opposite direction and it has
occurred on various occasions over a long period of time.
8. That, Further she stated that during a few overseas trips, despite repeatedly requesting
him not do do, Dr. Johnny would ensure that his seat on the airplane was next to that of
Dr. Manjari, In her letter, Dr. Majari wrote to Dr. Jacob that this amounted to sexual
harassment suffered by her and that she needs to be appropriately redressed.

9. That, As a response to this, Dr. Jacob replied that upon conducting a background
check, it was found that Dr. Majari had not received a degree from the University of
Marlborough as she had claimed in her application for employment. Therefore, apart
from divulging confidential information regarding patients, she had also commented
fraud on JJ Diagnostics by lying about her educational qualifications. As regards the
sexual harrasment allegations, an internal inquiry committee headed by Dr. Jacob
heated Dr. Manjari in detail and thereafter convened a meeting on December 10, 2004
to her Dr. Johnny.

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

ISSUES RAISED

Page | 7
 I. WHETHER SUIT FILED IN THE JURISDICTION OF DELHI COURT BY DELHI
DISCOVERY HOSPITAL IS MAINTAINABLE OR NOT?

II. WHETHER A SUIT FILED BY THE TFF FOUNDATION IN CALIFORNIA COURT

AND NOT IN DELHI COURT IS PROPER OR NOT?

III. WHETHER JJ DIAGNOSTIC HAS COMMITTED BREACH OF CONTRACT BY

LEAKING THE DATA OF DELHI DISCOVERY HOSPITAL AND TFF'S CLIENTS KR
NOT?

IV. WHETHER TERMINATION OF SERVICES OF THE FAULTY EMPLOYEE BY JJ

DIAGNOSTICS IS ENOUGH AD THERE IS NO LIABILITY TO AT DAMAGES TO
DELHI DISCOVERY HOSPITAL AND TFF OR NOT?

MEMORANDOM FOR RESPONDENT

Page | 8