Judgment : M.M. Sundresh, J. 1. This Original Side Appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, in A.No.3170 of 2013, in A.No.2015 of 2012, in O.P.No.285 of 2012, dated 25.7.2013. 2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the records. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned single Judge. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant could not represent before the learned single Judge and therefore the order requires modification, cannot be countenanced. If the appellant has got any grievance against the order passed by the learned single Judge, it is well open to her to approach the learned single Judge, by filing an appropriate application. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. However, we record the undertaking given by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the child will not be taken away by the respondent-father outside the city of Chennai, when the custody of the child is given to him. This Court has also passed an order, while entertaining this appeal, to the effect that the child shall not be taken outside Chennai by the respondent. By recording the said undertaking and by observing so, this Original Side Appeal is dismissed, giving liberty to the appellant to file an appropriate application before the learned single Judge. No costs. M.P.No.1 of 2013 is closed.