Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, Uday Kumar, JJ
Pradip Kumar Ganeriwala – Appellant
Versus
Rohan Ganeriwala and others – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counsel for respondent identifies errors in prior judgment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court evaluates merits of correction requests. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. certain corrections deemed innocuous. (Para 7) |
| 4. final order incorporates corrections and allows for review applications. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
1. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submits that certain errors crept in the judgment dated May 1, 2025 passed in FMAT 42 of 2025 with CAN 1 of
2025.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in principle, he does not have any objection to the other corrections than the corrections intended to paragraph nos.46 and 56 of the said judgment.
3. Upon a perusal of the corrections in paragraph nos.46 and 56 which are sought by the respondent no.1 now, we find that there might be some substance in the contention of the appellant that those relate to the merits of the case.
4. Even if there was an error in the order to that effect, the same cannot be corrected on mere verbal mentioning.
5. Inasmuch as the submission recorded in the said paragraphs to have been made by defendant nos.1 to 5, which now is sought to be argued to have been made by defendant no.2 only, since th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
