Before thinking of assailing the order, which is non-appeallable, at high court, I wanted to get the stay of execution that order , as a first and urgent need,
I was also expecting 'execution petition' very soon from opposite party.
What to do? Does Order 41 rule 5 apply to this scenario?
Also what is the sequence. First challenge/apply for set-aside the above type of order at right forum , and then secondly also apply for stay of execution.
OR
First apply there for stay of execution and then secondly apply for set-aside (And also ... if 'stay of execution' is granted then can one simply take more time to get the 'set-aside' application adjudicated?)
I have applied for 'review' of Order + 'stay of execution' of the same order.
But I quoted Order 41 Rule 5 on 'stay application' at the same trial court.
My understanding was that 'Review' also has the same format mutatis mutandis as 'memo of appeal' and also there is no any other definition of 'appeal' as well as 'appeallable'.
Please give definition of 'appellable'.
Refer to ADV Pateria's remarks
Also there are provision of stay of execution in appealling process/appellate jurisdiction. But code is silent on stay of execution in 'review jurisdiction'
Review applicant can't be left Remedyless in such scenario if he seeks 'stay of execution' until review petition is decided.
Please, Please reply and give your expert comments.
Thanks.