JPD. 1. August 2, 2025. CALCUTTA HIGH COURT MNS. In The Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side FMAT No. 15 of 2025 Dilip Kr. Prasad @ Dileep Kr. Prasad and others Vs. Dinesh Kumar Prasad @ Dinesh Prasad and others Mr. Bikramaditya Ghosh, Mr. Abhilash Mittal, Mr. Mayank Bhandari, Mr. Ved Rai … for the appellants. Mr. Arjun Kumar Sarkar, Mr. Abhijit Sarkar, Mr. Samundra Mani Pradhan, Mr. Satyam Lama, Mr. Navnit Yang Lama …for the respondents. 1. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in the order dated July 30, 2025, it had been mentioned that the appellants shall maintain proper accounts of the restaurant cum bar business being run from the suit property, whereas the licence is for hotel cum restaurant cum bar including foreign liquor business. 2. We do not find any reason to unnecessarily tinker with our order dated July 30, 2025, since it should obviously be understood by both the parties as to what business is being conducted from the suit property and it is nobody’s case that there are 2 different businesses running from the suit property apart from the one which we have mentioned. 3. Hence, the mention of the business as “restaurant cum bar business” would not affect the tenor of the order and it would be construed that the order refers to the “hotel cum restaurant cum bar business including foreign liquor”. (Uday Kumar, J.) (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)