https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291687 Section 114 and Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure govern review in appealable matters, but the text is analysed as limiting review where an appeal has already been preferred. The majority view treats the scheme of the Code as inconsistent with simultaneous pursuit of appeal and review: once an appeal is filed, the appellate court becomes seized of the matter and the review court loses competence. The contrary view, supported by other judges and prior authorities, says there is no express bar and no necessary implication divesting a review application validly filed before the appeal, particularly where Order 47 Rule 1(2) recognises some reviews despite a pending appeal by another party. en-us Thu, 29 Apr 1948 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:54:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291687 Section 114 and Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure govern review in appealable matters, but the text is analysed as limiting review where an appeal has already been preferred. The majority view treats the scheme of the Code as inconsistent with simultaneous pursuit of appeal and review: once an appeal is filed, the appellate court becomes seized of the matter and the review court loses competence. The contrary view, supported by other judges and prior authorities, says there is no express bar and no necessary implication divesting a review application validly filed before the appeal, particularly where Order 47 Rule 1(2) recognises some reviews despite a pending appeal by another party. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Apr 1948 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291687