Sangita Vs. Judicial Magistrate, First Class (deleted vide order dtd. 5/12/2014) and Another - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Jan-13-2015

Court: Mumbai Nagpur

LAW: Section 138, Section 138, Section 7, Section 138

CARDINAL: 1, 2., 3., 4. Rule, 5., 8), 1, 6, only one, 8., No.4, one, 9, one, 10

PERSON: Counsel, Counsel, N. I. Act, Counsel, Shri Daga, Counsel, Counsel, RTGS, Nagpur, Counsel

ORG: Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs, Maharashtra, LJSOFT, SC, the Hon'ble Apex Court, Court, Real Time Gross Settlement, RTGS, Court, Reserve Bank of India, RTGS, Reserve Bank of India, RTGS, Bank, Bank, N.I. Act, RTGS, the Reserve Bank of India, the Reserve Bank of India, the Reserve Bank of India, RTGS, RTGS, RTGS, the Hon'ble Apex Court, Reserve Bank of India, RTGS, RTGS, Judicial Magistrate, Court

DATE: 2009, 2014, 1881, 19/11/2014, ten days

PRODUCT: No.1, Q4

WORK_OF_ART: Gross Settlement, Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod

TIME: 30 minutes