A. K. YOG, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Sri Shyam Ji Gaur, advocate learned counsel for the applicant who has filed this transfer application under Section 24, Code of Civil Procedure, praying for transfer of Civil appeal No. 102 of 1994 pending before V-Additional Civil Judge. Shahjahanpur before another competent court at Shahjahanpur itself. ( 2 ) A transfer application was initially filed before the learned District Judge, Shahjahanpur by masroor, the applicant through Sri Rakesh Chandra Sharma, advocate dated 23. 3. 2002 (Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the present transfer application for short called the affidavit), Madan Lal, respondent through his counsel filed objections denying the allegations in the Transfer Application Annexure-2 to the affidavit. ( 3 ) THE learned District Judge rejected aforesaid Transfer Application vide order dated 16. 4. 2002, observed that Madan Lal has rebutted the allegations made by Masroor to the effect that he (Madan Lal) had gone to the house of the concerned Presiding Officer and that said Madan did not know where the house of the said officer was situated. ( 4 ) THERE is no averment in the affidavit before this Court to show that the objection of Madan Lal was controverted before the District Judge. ( 5 ) THE learned District Judge had rightly rejected the Transfer Application No. 52 of 2002 vide order dated 16. 4,2002 (Annexure-3 to the affidavit ). ( 6 ) APART from the reasons given in the order of the learned District Judge, it is to be noted that in the transfer application dated 23. 3. 2002 (Annexure-1 to the affidavit), vague allegations were made. A Court expects that when a transfer application, containing serious allegations against a judicial officer are made and through an application drafted by an advocate, the said transfer application should contain relevant details so as to inspire confidence in the Court and make it believe that at least prima facie, allegations are genuine and bona fide. ( 7 ) IN the instant transfer application dated 23. 3. 2002 (Annexure-1 to the affidavit), the applicant and his counsel have not mentioned as to what was the time in the evening when the said applicant saw Madan Lal going with the alleged goods. ( 7 ) IN the instant transfer application dated 23. 3. 2002 (Annexure-1 to the affidavit), the applicant and his counsel have not mentioned as to what was the time in the evening when the said applicant saw Madan Lal going with the alleged goods. It is not mentioned as to where the house of the said judicial officer was situated and even the details of the alleged goods have not been disclosed. The transfer application has apparently been made to malign the judicial officer by making wild allegations against him. ( 8 ) SRI Rakesh Chandra Sharma, advocate certainly did not discharge his professional duties with due care and sense of responsibility at his command expected from him, an officer of the Court, apart from being counsel of a particular party. ( 9 ) THE transfer application is, accordingly, rejected as frivolous with cost which I quantify at Rs. 2,500 which may be deposited with the State Legal Authority, at Allahabad in this Court within one week from today. The learned counsel for the applicant shall produce deposit receipt before the Registrar General along with affidavit of the applicant indicating that such costs have been deposited with the State Legal Authority. The file shall be placed before the Registrar General on 9. 5. 2002. ( 10 ) IN case appellant falls to deposit the cost, the Registrar General shall sent requisition to the district Magistrate, Shahjahanpur for recovery of the same as land revenue. .