https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299654 An order restoring an execution case under the court's inherent powers was held not to be appealable because it was collateral to execution and did not determine any question of execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the decree; section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure therefore did not apply. Revisional interference under section 115 was also confined to jurisdictional error or material irregularity, and not mere error on facts or law. As the executing court had jurisdiction to restore the matter, the High Court exceeded its revisional limits in setting aside that order and remanding the case. en-us Thu, 30 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Dec 2021 10:49:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299654 An order restoring an execution case under the court's inherent powers was held not to be appealable because it was collateral to execution and did not determine any question of execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the decree; section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure therefore did not apply. Revisional interference under section 115 was also confined to jurisdictional error or material irregularity, and not mere error on facts or law. As the executing court had jurisdiction to restore the matter, the High Court exceeded its revisional limits in setting aside that order and remanding the case. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 30 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299654