Company: ZCARW
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001213900-25-014437
Chunk: 489

Company: Zoomcar Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part II, Item 1
Chunk 489
---
 Guests
but also may negatively affect acquisitions of new Hosts and Guests, which may adversely affect our business, financial conditions and
results of operations. Unreliable ratings and reviews could also make it more difficult for us to enforce quality standards, which could
damage our reputation and reduce trust within our community.

Additionally, our ability
to attract and retain Hosts and Guests is dependent in part on our ability to provide high-quality customer support services. Hosts and
Guests depend on our customer support centers to resolve any issues relating to our platform both during and after their trips. As we
continue to grow our business and improve our platform, we will face challenges related to providing high-quality support services at
scale. Any failure to maintain high-quality support, or a market perception that we do not maintain high-quality support, could harm our
reputation, and adversely affect our ability to scale our platform and business, our financial condition, and results of operations.

94

A former employee of Zoomcar India has instituted
a wrongful termination suit and claims that certain Zoomcar options have vested.

In February 2023, a former
employee of Zoomcar India instituted a suit before the City Civil and Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru against Zoomcar India, Zoomcar
and IOAC challenging his termination, claiming approximately $400,000 in damages, and claiming that 100,000 options to purchase shares
of Zoomcar have vested. On March 3, 2023, the City Civil and Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, issued an interim injunction to restrain
each of Zoomcar and IOAC from “alienating or dealing” the 100,000 shares of Zoomcar claimed by the former employee while the
suit is pending. Zoomcar believes that such claims are baseless and is attempting to have the interim order vacated. In addition, Zoomcar
India filed an application in the former employee’s suit, seeking that IOAC be deleted from the array of parties in the suit, inter
alia since (i) IOAC is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the suit; (ii) no reliefs have been sought by the former employee from
IOAC; and (iii) there is no cause of action against IOAC. However, there can be no assurance that Zoomcar India and Zoomcar will be successful
in their efforts to have the matter vacated or IOAC deleted from the parties, and such efforts may be time-consuming, costly and may have
reputational