1 ca 802.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 802 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 39 OF 2011 1. Shankar Shantling Gujar and another .. Applicants Versus 1. Shantabai W/o Vithal Tonge and anr. .. Respondents Shri B. R. Sontakke Patil, Advocate for Applicants. Shri Vivek Bhavthankar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 21ST APRIL, 2011. PER COURT : . This is an application for stay of the impugned judgment and decree. The decree is only to the extent of declaration. The said is not an executable decree. As such, no stay can be granted Rule 05 of Order 41 of the Civil Procedure Code. Shri Sontakke Patil, the learned counsel states that the non applicant is trying to alienate the property. Liberty to the applicant to move for 2 ca 802.11 appropriate remedy in that regard. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/April 11