Smt Mahalakshmi vs Mr T Balachandran on 25 October, 2010

3

3. The respondent has entered appearance through?'-.<his_

Advocate, he has not filed objections and there is no _

for the respondent.

4. The respondent has not denied’the.avernj1ents
Keeping in View the distance between and
the petitioner is permanentigirflii:’esi«ding; :a_t’»T'[‘«la_11ur v’HVVi11age in
Chamarajanagar Taiuk and shevph.-as no the case at

KGF, it is a fit case to4_Vtifan;sfer thecase tobhafriariajanagar.

5. In the’.¢e’su1t,d’th§’1:}jfetitior1._is«.ailowed and the case in M C

No.78 /2009 pefiding :ii1e44Vo£_rC’iVi1’Judge (Sr. Divn). KGF, Kolar

District, is withdraiiwnlandi made’ to the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) at

Chan1ara’a:r1a9’ar;’ for dis’ “osai, in accordance with law. No costs.
.. ._ _ «J , .. …..

sew
‘Judge