Kolkata, October 3: In a brief but notable sitting on Thursday, the Calcutta High Court revised parts of its own judgment issued last week in a dispute between Hatisala Developers Pvt Ltd and The Statesman Limited. The correction hearing, held before Justices Arijit Banerjee and Om Narayan Rai, saw advocates from both sides present as the bench clarified several words and phrases from the earlier order.
Read also: Meghalaya High Court Upholds Old Pension Rights for Junior Divisional Accountants, Rejects State
Background
The original dispute revolves around a commercial property matter involving Hatisala Developers, a prominent real estate company, and The Statesman Limited, a historic newspaper publisher. Although the details of the underlying conflict were not argued at length today, the September 26 order had contained some errors, which prompted a recall for limited correction. Both Hatisala Developers and another party, Merlin Projects Ltd, had filed separate appeals in the same matter.
Inside the courtroom, advocates Ms. Suranjana Chatterjee and Mr. Sourav Sharma represented Hatisala Developers. Ms. Vrinda Kedia and Mr. Abhidipto Tarafdar appeared for one of the respondents, while Mr. Sakabda Roy and Mr. Souvik Ghosh represented The Statesman.
Read also: Tripura High Court Orders HSCL to Pay Rs.1.26 Crore to Contractor for Arbitrary Contract Termination
Court’s Observations
The bench noted that certain words in the earlier judgment had been either wrongly inserted or misprinted. Justice Banerjee stated openly, “Let the judgment and order dated September 26, 2025, be corrected in the following manner,” before reading out a list of five changes.
Among the changes:
- The term “ex parte” was to be removed from paragraphs 3 and 6.
- The word “position” in paragraph 5 was to be replaced with “possession.”
- In paragraph 6, “Statesman” would be deleted and substituted with “the parties.”
- After the word “executed” in paragraph 12, the phrase “the conveyance” would be added.
- And in paragraph 57, “mortgagee” would be replaced with “mortgagor.”
Read also: Tripura High Court slams Railways for delay in land compensation, dismisses revision plea with costs
These might sound technical, but in practice such corrections can significantly alter how an order is interpreted. One advocate present remarked quietly after the hearing, “This is important because these words can change obligations in property law.”
Decision
Concluding the session, the bench ordered that all five corrections be formally incorporated into the September 26, 2025 judgment. No other aspects of the order were reopened. With that, the judges rose, leaving the amended judgment as the operative order going forward.
Case Title: Hatisala Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Statesman Limited & Another
Case Numbers: APOT/265/2025 and APOT/268/2025
Date of Order (Correction): 3 October 2025
