U/s 340 application - why resistance

Looking for suggestions and how to move forward: Plaintiff filed a money recovery suite for 2 different bills as 2 claims. For one bill, Plaintiff filed all fabricated documents (not forgery). Defendant also made a 1 claim in the same suite for related transaction. Trail court considering defense evidence, Decreed 1 bill in full, and 2nd bill dismissed for the reason fabricated documents. Defendant 1 claim was party allowed. Court in the judgment mentioned that "considering the evidence on record, I am of the opinion, the documents have been fabricated......" But trail court did not pursue further to refer this for criminal prosecution. Since the money involved, Defendant appealed against the judgment which HC stayed the judgment subject to deposit of decree amount. Plaintiff accepted the Judgment as is without filing appeal which indicates that 2nd bill indeed fabricated document. Since it's in the knowledge of Defendant about fabricated bills, wants to make a 340 application in the trail court. But advocates resisting to file application stating Judgment is stayed so trail court will not entertain 340 application. My point of argument is, Stay is on the operative part of Judgment and decree and if any pending execution application. Court already made a note in the judgment about Fabricated Document has been evidenced which is produced during trail and same has been repeated under OATH also which can not be erased. This act of plaintiff is nothing but interference in the administration of justice and giving false statements under oath. Should this not be punished. Several HC/SC orders says that, parties who are misleading court by producing fabricated documents should not go un-punished. But for me seems end of it and unable to move forward or strategy. Any suggestion.