No liabilities

The concept of love contract comes into picture so that the firms can wash their hands off any controversy regarding any relationship between two of their employees turning sour later on. In this case, the HR manager, Pritam Singh, had developed a relationship with a Senior Software Engineer, whose placement in the company he had felicitated.

A company should not have any problem with two persons entering into a mutually agreed relationship. However the problem arises as there is a difference in the level of seniority between the two and also Pritam being the HR manager is in a direct position to influence the progress of Jagruti. (remember "Life in a Metro!")

All the company wants to ensure that if sometimes later, both Pritam and Jagruti decide to part ways, and then Jagruti should not be claiming that Pritam had cheated her and misused his position and sue the company. (remember "Aitraaz").

As for the part about couples being more stable in their personal life and hence more productive in their professional life (remember the hiring criteria that the senior management gives to Tom Cruise in the movie "The Firm"), there could be some element of truth in the fact. However, in such a case a "Love Contract" is not necessary as the very fact that a person is married amounts to the declaration that the couple is in a relationship which is mutual. Under such a scenario, even if the couple do decide to part ways later on, then firm cannot be held liable.

However, what is bothersome is the manner in which Pritam was asked to sign the contract. Why he was not allowed to read the contract before signing? Did the General Manager really think that such a seasoned manager will sign a document without reading it? Why was Jagruti, the relatively inexperienced of the two, called in before, whereas people normally consult the more experienced and with one who has been with the firm for a long period of time (in this case, Pritam) in such serious matter? What was the situation under which Jagruti signed the document? Was she also not allowed to read it?

These are some of the questions that need answering for the case to be analysed further.