P.B. Majmudar, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd May, 2007, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Mumbai in Petition No. B-83 of 2002. By the aforesaid order, the learned Judge has held that the respondent No.1 herein is legally wedded wife of Krishnat Bachhe (Patil). By the aforesaid order, the learned Judge also directed the appellant herein not to withdraw any amount from respondent No.2 wherein deceased Krishnat Bachhe (Patil) was serving.

2. The facts leading to the controversy are as under.

3. Respondent No.1, Rupali Krishnant Bachhe (Patil) filed a petition before the Family Court at Bandra, Bombay seeking declaration that (i) she is the legally wedded wife of one Krishnant Bachhe (Patil)and (ii) the marriage between appellant and the late Krishnant Bachhe (Patil) is illegal, null and void. Respondent No.1 also prayed that she is entitled to the property left by the deceased Krishnant Bachhe (Patil). The said petition was opposed by the present appellant who was respondent No.1 in the said petition before the Family Court at Bandra. The petition filed by respondent No.1 was resisted by the present appellant on the ground that she is the legally wedded wife of deceased Krishna Patil. The case projected by respondent No.1 herein in a nutshell is as under.

4. Respondent No.1 got married to one Krishnant Bachhe (Patil) as per Hindu Vedic rites and customs on 7th June, 1978. Her maiden name before the marriage was Rupali Vishnu Patil Akkatai. From the said wedlock, a daughter named Megha Rani Patil was born. It is averred in the petition that the said Krishnant Bachhe (Patil) was working as an Assistant Teacher in the school run by respondent No.2 and that she was completely unaware of the relationship between the appellant and the said Krishnant Bachhe (Patil). According to respondent No.1, the said Krishnant Bachhe (Patil) expired on 19th July, 2002. It is stated in the petition that respondent No.1 wrote a letter through her advocate to respondent No.2 demanding gratuity, pension and other benefits after the death of Krishnant Bachhe (Patil), hereinafter “the deceased”. Respondent No.1 sent a copy of the said letter to the appellant also. On receiving the notice, the appellant sent her reply immediately claiming that she is the legally wedded of the deceased. As stated above, respondent No.1 filed a petition in the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai on 24th September, 2002 for seeking the aforesaid declarations. She also sought an injunction to the effect that the appellant may be restraining from selling, transferring, creating third party rights of any nature whatsoever, alienating, encumbering or changing the status quo in respect of flat at Rainbow Apartment, 2nd floor, I.C. Colony, Borivli (West), Mumbai and further that the appellant may be restrained from withdrawing any amounts from respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 also sought leave under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code to file a substantive suit in respect of the aforesaid flat.

5. The aforesaid petition was resisted by the appellant by filing her written statement. It is the case of the appellant that she got married to Krishna Patil on 13th December, 1982. At that time he was working as an Assistant Teacher in Mount Mary High School where the appellant was also working as a Teacher. At the time of her marriage, Krishna Patil claimed that he was a bachelor. After marriage, on 24th December, 1982, they went to Krishna Patil’s native village at Savarde and met all his family members and at that time neither respondent No.1 nor any family members made any complaint against her marriage with Krishna Patil. It is also the case of the appellant that in 1984 she purchased a flat at Dahisar viz. Flat No. A/403, Shivganga Apartment, 4th floor, Chatrapati Shivaji Road, Dahisar (East), Mumbai400 068, utilising her mother’s fund. Out of the said wedlock, appellant also gave birth to two sons in Septembe