Despite all the Congress propaganda stating otherwise, Delhi High Court has noted that neither Smriti Irani nor her teenage daughter Zoish Irani was ever issued a license in connection with a restaurant named Silly Souls Cafe and Bar located in Goa.
Justice Mini Pushkarna made these observations while issuing summons to Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh, Pawan Khera, and Netta D’Souza in a civil defamation suit filed by Union Minister Smriti Irani against them seeking damages of Rupees 2 Crores for their libelous statements.
Earlier, Congress leaders in a press conference had alleged that the restaurant ‘Silly Souls Cafe and Bar’ is run by Union Smriti Irani’s daughter in Goa, and it had got its excise license fraudulently. Following the allegations, Smriti Irani sent a legal notice to Congress and its senior leaders Pawan Khera, Jairam Ramesh, and Netta D’Souza over their malicious allegations against her daughter and asked them to tender a written unconditional apology.
The hit-job against Irani and her daughter didn’t stop with the fake allegations by the Congress leaders, fake menus of the restaurant were circulated with beef in the menu to try and demonise the BJP leader. Senior Trinamool Congress leader like Kirti Azad even posted highly derogatory caricatures of Irani in the aftermath of the manufactured controversy.
Meanwhile, on Friday, July 29, owners of the restaurant Merlyn Anthony D’Gama and her son Dean D’Gama replied to a show cause notice issued by Excise Commissioner Narayan M Gad. In the reply, they stated that the property “is exclusively its business and involves no other person/ persons”.
However, once the case went to court, the High Court asked the Congress leaders involved to delete all allegations made by them in their press conference from all social media platforms.
Smriti Irani is further vindicated today, as the court noted, “Considering the documents on record it is clearly seen that there was no license which was ever issued in favour of the plaintiff or her daughter. The plaintiff or her daughter are not the owners of the restaurant. It has also been established by the plaintiff prima facie that the plaintiff or her daughter never applied for license.”
