Mom's Belief pursues three pending cases against former staff

Mom's Belief is pursuing three pending actions against former employees or a former consultant over alleged proprietary-data theft, contract breaches and client solicitation. Its largest claim seeks Rs 2.001 crore in the Delhi High Court, where a Local Commissioner recorded alleged obstruction during a court-ordered commission executed on April 17, 2023.

Why is Mom's Belief pursuing former employees and consultants?

Mom's Belief says its three actions seek to protect confidential information, proprietary data, copyright, client relationships and contractual rights. The company distinguished these proceedings, which it filed, from litigation against it: as of the Red Herring Prospectus date, Mom's Belief reported no outstanding criminal, regulatory, tax or other pending material litigation initiated against the company.

The disclosed matters concern different alleged conduct and legal processes. The criminal complaint against former employee Pankaj Kumar alleges theft and unauthorised misappropriation of proprietary data; the Delhi High Court suit alleges contract, data, copyright and website-passing-off breaches; and the Gurugram civil suit alleges client solicitation by former consultant Dr. Manish Samnani.

Mom's Belief's board adopted a litigation-materiality policy on July 13, 2026 under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements Regulations. The policy treats a civil or arbitration proceeding as material when the monetary claim or expected impact reaches Rs 19.5 lakh, the lowest of its three thresholds. The two quantified civil claims are Rs 2.001 crore and Rs 44.9 lakh, while the criminal complaint has no stated monetary claim.

What is the Rs 2.001 crore Mom's Belief contract case about?

Mom's Belief's largest disclosed civil action is a Delhi High Court suit seeking permanent injunctions and Rs 2.001 crore in damages from Pankaj Kumar, Naini Anand, Ankush Jariyal and Bharat Home Medicare Private Limited. Mom's Belief alleges that former employees breached contracts, infringed company data and copyright, and passed off the defendants' website as Mom's Belief's website. These are allegations in a pending proceeding, not findings of liability.

The Delhi High Court's April 13, 2020 order restrained the defendants from using Mom's Belief confidential or proprietary information for any purpose. The same order restrained them from operating computers, systems, laptops or other devices, and from deleting data from servers or external drives. It also appointed a Local Commissioner, a court-appointed person assigned to carry out the commission ordered by the court.

The Local Commissioner executed the commission on April 17, 2023 but was restrained from entering Bharat Home Medicare Private Limited's premises, according to the prospectus. In a report dated April 21, 2025 and submitted to the Delhi High Court, the Commissioner recorded obstruction and non-cooperation in executing the commission. Mom's Belief filed a contempt petition against the defendant over the alleged obstruction, and the matter remains pending.

What happened in Mom's Belief's data-theft criminal complaint?

Mom's Belief filed a criminal complaint against former employee Pankaj Kumar at the Cyber Cell Police Station, Gurugram, on October 26, 2022. The complaint alleged theft and unauthorised misappropriation of Mom's Belief proprietary data, criminal breach of trust, cheating and allied offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Information Technology Act, 2000.

A first information report, or FIR, was registered on March 7, 2023 under Section 66B of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The prospectus identifies Section 66B as the provision under which the FIR was registered. It does not disclose a court determination on the allegations, a damages claim or a timetable for conclusion of the criminal matter.

Mom's Belief subsequently applied to the District Court in Gurugram, Haryana for supply of data material recovered from the accused person's phone, citing dissatisfaction with the investigation. The application is listed for the investigating officer's reply and remains pending before the District Court. The disclosed next step is therefore the officer's response rather than a trial date or financial outcome.

How does the client-solicitation case differ from the data cases?

Mom's Belief's case against Dr. Manish Samnani concerns alleged client solicitation rather than alleged misuse of digital information. Mom's Belief filed the suit before the Civil Judge, Gurugram, seeking a permanent injunction and initial damages of Rs 20 lakh for alleged breach of a memorandum of understanding resulting from solicitation of Mom's Belief clients.

On September 14, 2020, the Civil Judge granted an interim stay restraining Dr. Samnani from soliciting any Mom's Belief client. An interim stay is a temporary direction that applies while the underlying civil suit remains unresolved. The disclosed order did not finally decide liability or award damages.

Mom's Belief later applied to amend its plaint, the formal statement of claim in a civil suit, to add Rs 24.9 lakh in compensation. The Civil Judge allowed the amendment on September 16, 2021, bringing the stated damages sought to Rs 44.9 lakh. That amount remains a claim sought by Mom's Belief because the suit is pending.

How material are Mom's Belief's disclosed legal actions?

Mom's Belief set its materiality threshold at Rs 19.5 lakh, calculated as 5% of the average absolute profit or loss after tax for the previous three annual restated financial-information periods. This was lower than 2% of turnover at Rs 1.633 crore and 2% of net worth at Rs 61.6 lakh. The Delhi claim exceeds the threshold by Rs 1.806 crore, while the Gurugram claim exceeds it by Rs 25.4 lakh.

The prospectus separates claims made by Mom's Belief from disclosed litigation exposure involving its relevant parties. Mom's Belief reported no material litigation against its subsidiaries, directors, promoters, key managerial personnel or senior managerial personnel as of the prospectus date. It also reported that group companies were not party to litigation having a material impact on Mom's Belief.

Mom's Belief also stated that it, its promoters and directors had not been declared wilful defaulters by the Reserve Bank of India or another governmental authority. The company said neither it nor its promoters or directors had been debarred from securities dealings or capital-market access by the Securities and Exchange Board of India, and no such proceedings were pending or threatened that could materially affect its business or financial position.

Conclusion

Mom's Belief's disclosed litigation position is centred on enforcement actions it has brought against former personnel, rather than material claims brought against the company. The Rs 2.001 crore Delhi High Court claim combines alleged contractual, data, copyright and passing-off conduct; the Rs 44.9 lakh Gurugram claim addresses alleged client solicitation; and the criminal complaint concerns alleged proprietary-data misuse.

The disclosed procedural points to watch are the investigating officer's reply before the District Court in Gurugram, the pending contempt petition linked to the April 21, 2025 Local Commissioner report, and the unresolved client-solicitation suit following the September 16, 2021 amendment. Mom's Belief has not disclosed expected resolution dates, final liability findings or likely financial recoveries for the three matters.