High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Rathnavva vs Siddappa @ Siddaraju on 13 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Rathnavva vs Siddappa @ Siddaraju on 13 January, 2009
Author: A.S.Bopanna
TEES PE'Ti'1'¥ON is ¥«'iLE3 UNDER SEC24 OF  I1%RA*:iI»:G''' : '
TO TRARSFER THE PRGCEEDINGS mi MC. NO_:.ifCi;"E.*f}O?..'F?iLED"" 
BY RESPONDENT PENDING on THE FSLE QF' T:-IE Crag. JUVDGEL-V_

(SR. am, DAVANAGERE Tc: THE FILE OF’ “1533 CE’.?§L’–s_fi._iD’GE 1

{SR DBL} AND CIJM, HAVERE FGR THE {)ESf?i3S.-:XL.7._

This Petition coming (Hi -gfpr éigy, >

Court made the following :

0

RDERf X_

The pgtitiancr is hQe:Vi2_;fiA$:_-,V that the
pnaccedings ‘t}I::c: file of the I”
Add}. Civii Davangere be
tra11sfr31jr~E£i”‘:¢_’w:V.A:’¢;’€*£1;igc (Sr. 1311.), Have-.:r.i far

disposaifz-«f ” .

£2; _ Tfifi’-.I”‘EV1Eifi{)Ilt:E%h?&3 between the parties is not in

E”Ai1;a$§z§Jguc:h tha petititrner is the with of the

” is marital discord between the petitioner

andflae and they have been nzsiding separately

“»-v.__ ‘since fiztfyear 1995 and {hay have: three children. The

arm faitriy aged and at this stage aiso they are

V. – — ” iiijifigatilzg.

J:

‘ «fiéédxdizagly stands disposed of with no

s;_>1iie_15 as icy (;*:v;>V$ts.” ‘_.

V

Davangerc and dttfzand the litigation. Hence, ig V’
aspects :i:t3.t0 ocmsidemfion, I am of the K x

sought for by The Pfifittioner rcqune’ 3 {£9 ‘

ii}. Therefore, thf;

before the C’..0u1’t 9f 18* and C.J.M.
Davangere is shall stand-

irallsfcrrcd til} ‘Ef€ivc::’i.. The papers
shaii be dour: at Havcri shall
with law aficr providing

oppofiiufiity “tZ*1’§e said petition.

Sd/-»
Judge