A SMALL SAMPLE OF DATABASE :: Complete database can be accessed offline at the Lab through prior request.

Law and the Image
The Media Lab : Jadavpur University


Appellants: Panchireddi Appala Suramma alias Gadela Appalasuramma Vs. Respondent: Gadela Ganapatlu.

Dublin Core


Appellants: Panchireddi Appala Suramma alias Gadela Appalasuramma Vs. Respondent: Gadela Ganapatlu.


Court case


Judgment passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court declaring that the object of Hindu Marriage Act is, “to prevent and eradicate the evil of child marriage... a marriage between bride and bridegroom, if their ages do not satisfy the requirements of clause (iii) Section 5… is no marriage in the eye of the law and it cannot be solemnized. It is for that reason that there is no reference to the clause (iii) of Section 5 either in Sec.11 or Sec. 12.”

This decision was subsequently overturned by a full bench in the HC in 1977, deeming, “we find that consequences of accepting the view will be very serious… the Court should lean against the interpretation of any provision of the law which is liable to render innocent children of the marriage bastards.”
The appellant is the wife. Admittedly, she was aged about six years at the date of her marriage with the respondent, who was then eleven years old, the date of marriage being Vaisakha Bahula Pancharm in Hevilambi year (1957). On 6-5-1958, the father of the appellant is alleged to have executed a settlement deed conferring certain rights on the appellant and the respondent. In 1967, misunderstandings arose between the appellant's father and the family of the respondent. The appellant's father then turned out the respondent from his house and executed a revocation deed on 1-5-1967 purporting to revoke the settlement deed executed by him earlier on 6-5-1958. On 9-5-1967, he issued a registered notice to the respondent repudiating the marriage between the appellant and the respondent. To that, the respondent sent a reply warning the appellant's father against the consequences he may have to face in case he got the appellant married to another person. The appellant never joined the respondent at any time and, therefore, the respondent filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. That application was resisted by the appellant, among other grounds on the ground that no marriage took place and even otherwise, any such marriage would be a void marriage under Section 5 of the said Act.








The Media Lab








AIR 1975 AP 193

Document Item Type Metadata

Original Format




"Appellants: Panchireddi Appala Suramma alias Gadela Appalasuramma Vs. Respondent: Gadela Ganapatlu.," in Law and the Image, Item #24, http://lawimage.medialabju.org/items/show/24 (accessed April 25, 2019).


This item has no location info associated with it.

Social Bookmarking


Creative Commons License

File: Panchireddi Suramma Vs Gadela Gangapatlu.pdf

Previous Item | Next Item