- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.1798 OF 2008 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1294 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.1968 OF 2005. Parmanand T. Manwani & Anr. ..Plaintiffs. vs. Madan Devkishan Bhatia & Ors. ..Defendants. And M/s. Faldayni Realtors Pvt.Ltd. ..Applicant. And Akshay Jain & Anr. ..Noticees. .... Mr.Lalit Jain, for the Plaintiffs. Mr.Tushar Goradia, a/w. Ms.Nisha Parmar, for Noticees. Mr.S.C. Naidu, for the Defendant No.1. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 28TH JANUARY 2009 : 28TH JANUARY 2009 : 28TH JANUARY 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This suit is filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants for specific performance of the MOU dated 26th July 2002 pertaining to the suit property. In the suit, chamber summons no.1294 of 2008 is taken out by the applicant-Company M/s.Faldayni Realtors Pvt.Ltd. The said chamber summons is taken out by the applicants for being joined as party defendants to the suit on the ground that the brother of defendant no. 1 had executed another MOU dated 23rd April 2006 with the applicant-Company, in respect of the same suit property. 2. In the affidavit in support of the chamber summons filed by the Mr.Akshay Jain who is the power of attorney - 2 - holder of the applicant-Company and brother of Mr.Rakesh Kumar Jain, at several places, instead of stating that the MOU was entered into by and between the applicant-Company and the brother of the defendant no.1, it is stated that the MOU was entered into between the applicant and the defendant no.1. In view thereof, by an order of this Court dated 21st October 2008 [Coram : R.M.Savant, J.], a show cause notice was directed to be issued to Mr.Akshay Jain and Rakesh Kumar Jain, the Directors of the applicant-Company calling upon them to show cause as to why action for perjury as contemplated under section 191 of the Indian Penal Code, should not be taken against them. 3. Thereafter, show cause notice as directed by this Court was issued and served on Mr.Akshay Jain and Mr.Rakesh Jain. Pursuant to the said notice, the applicants are heard in the matter. They have at the outset tendered an unconditional apology and have pointed out from their reply dated 13th January 2009 in response to the show cause notice, that the statement made in the affidavit at several places that the MOU dated 23rd April 2006 executed by and between the applicants and defendant no.1, is a mistake caused due to inadvertance and that what they wanted to state was that the MOU was entered into by and between the - 3 - applicants and the brother of the defendant no.1. 4. The document which is annexed as Exh-A to the affidavit in support of chamber summons to the above suit is the copy of the MOU dated 23rd April 2006 between the applicants and the brother of defendant no.1, which shows that the defendant no.1 was not concerned with the said MOU. The Advocate appearing for the plaintiffs and the defendant no.1 have also submitted that the statement made in the affidavit in support of the chamber summons by the noticees, appears due to inadvertance. It is, therefore, clear that the statement made in the affidavit in support of the chamber summons namely that MOU dated 23rd April 2006 was entered into by and between the applicants and the defendant no.1 is a genuine mistake on the part of the noticees and they had no intention of making any false statement before this Court. 5. The apology tendered by Mr.Akshay Jain and Mr. Rakesh Jain is accepted. They are also warned that they should not execute any pleadings/Affidavits without confirming its contents. 6. In view thereof, the show cause notice issued against Mr.Akshay Jain and Mr.Rakesh Jain is hereby - 4 - discharged. [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]