Andhra Pradesh Court July 1969 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
G.G. Padma Rao Vs. Swarajya Lakshmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1969
Reported in: AIR1970AP300
1. This is an appeal from the order of the Second Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad passed in O. P. No. 5 of 1965 on 22-2-1966 whereby the learned Judge dismissed the application filed by the appellant against his wife under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. The material facts are that the appellant filed a petition under section 13 of the Act against his wife for dissolution of marriage on the ground that the wife for a period of not less than three years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition has been suffering from a virulent and incurable form of leprosy. The marriage between the parties took place on 17-6-1963. The husband was then 28 years and the wife was 20 years of age. Out of their wedlock one child was born on 22-6-1964. The petition was presented on 4-1-1965 on the above said ground.3. The wife in her counter denied the allegation that she has been suffering for more than three years from a virule...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Matha Satyam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ393
Ananthanarayana Ayyar, J.1. In C. C. 57 of 1967 on, the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Rajam, the Food Inspector, Rajam Panchayat Board filed a complaint against the accused alleging that on 24-6-1967 the accused had brought two seers of buffalo milk to Sankara Vilas for sale, that the Food Inspector took a sample of milk and gave Rs. 0.50 p. to the accused towards the price of the sample of milk after observing all the prescribed formalities that on analysis the milk was found to be adulterated and that therefore, the accused committed an offence punishable under Sections 16(1) and 7 and read with. Section 2(i)(a) and (1) and Rule 44(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The accused denied having committed the offence. The learned Magistrate, after full trial, acquitted the accused. The learned Public Prosecutor filed this appeal against the acquittal.2. The prosecution examined two witnesses and their evidence is as follows:-P.W. 2 is the proprietor of Sankara V...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›