RUPAK GUPTA Vs. BANARAS HOUSE (P.) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order governs C.A. No. 392/2012 filed by Respondents No. 1 and No. 2 -A to 2 -P for dismissal of the Company Petition in limine. In this order the question which is also being considered and is of grave concern to this Board is whether the sanctity attached to affidavits by courts of law should be allowed to be abused by Law Firms, Litigants and the Notary.

(2.) BRIEF facts are as under: -

(3.) IT is also essential to note that CP. No. 75(ND)/2012 bears the date of 8th June, 2012 and was filed through Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff & Co., Advocates (henceforth the Law Firm) a well -reputed law -firm of Delhi. Each page of CP No. 75(ND)/2012 bears two signatures out of which one is of Mrs. Supriya Gupta P -3. It went unnoticed that the other signature in the petition was not that of the Petitioner Mr. Rupak Gupta in three different capacities as P -1, P -2 and P -4. No explanation whatsoever was to be found in the petition regarding the person who had signed the petition besides Mrs. Supriya Gupta. Even his name was not disclosed under his signatures. The four affidavits filed with the petition though signed by the deponents on 30th May, 2012 were notarised on 8th June, 2012 by one Notary Mr. Ashok Kumar of Delhi with Regn. No. 3061. It is important to note that these affidavits were registered in the notary Register at Sl.No. 347/2012, 348/2012, 349/2012 and 350/2012.