DINESH MEHTA,J. - (1.) The present appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred challenging the order dated 16.08.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.2, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court') in Civil Appeal No.60/2006, whereby the appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff, against the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2006 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.), City North, Udaipur has been rejected.
(2.) Succinctly stated the facts are that the appellants-plaintiffs, being first wife and son of Late Amba Lal Khatik instituted a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the defendants, being second wife and her children of the wedlock with Amba Lal Khatik.
(3.) The plaintiff No.2 Jamna Bai claimed herself be the legally wedded wife of said Amba Lal Khatik, and alleged that Shanta Bai was not a legally wedded wife and so were her children defendant No.2 to 5, hence after the death of said Amba Lal Khatik, who owned a residential house, and other movable property car, jeep and vehicle have vested in them. With these assertion the plaintiffs mandatory and permanent injunction praying that the defendants be restrained from alienating the above mentioned movable and immovable property owned by Amba Lal Khatik.;