P B vs.p - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Feb-26-2019

Court: Delhi

LAW: Section 19, the Family Courts Act, Section 13, Page 1, Page 4, Page 5, Article 142 of the Constitution for dissolution, Article 142 of the Constitution of India, Page 9, Page 10, Page 11, Article 142 of Constitution of India, Page 12, Page 13

CARDINAL: 02.2019, 54/2018, 1, 23.11.2017, 13 2, 03.10.2009, 2, 13, Rs.2, two, 3, 13 6, 4, 77 to 83, 82, 6, 7, 13 8.5, 234, 20, 8, 9, 13 10, 14, three, one

PERSON: Ankit Mutreja, Aditya Agarwal, Zain Ahmed Advocate, G.S. SISTANI, JYOTI SINGH G.S. SISTANI, J.(ORAL, Anil, Suman Arora, Lakhs, RW1, Naveen Kohli, Neelu Kohli, again.78, Saroj Sharma, A.K. Chitale, S.S. Dahiya, Husband, Sandhya, Manish Kumar, Madhvi Ramesh Dudani, Ramesh K. MAT, KHC Dudani, 807 Shrikumar V. Unnithan v. Manju K. Nair, Bhagat, D. Bhagat, SCC558Navin Kohli v. Neelu Kohli, Rita Mukherjee, Manish Goel, Rohini Goel, Kaslefsky v. Kaslefsky, Sandhya Kumari, Ramesh K. Dudani, L.J.307, Shrikumar V. Unnithan, Manju K. Nair, Navin Kohli, JYOTI SINGH

DATE: 1984, 1955, 25.03.2009, 07.09.2009, daily, 13.10.2009, only for few months, today, 2006, more than 10 years, 2007, the year 1981, 49 years, 1981, 1975, March 08, 2011, mid-July, 2011 i.e., four months, day, mid-July, 2011, 13 2007, 1994, more than 17 years, about 24 years, 1950, Para 76, their day to day, nine years, Rs.10,000/-, 2019

ORG: the Hindu Marriage Act, APP, MAT, 06.10.2009, the Family Court, The Family Court, Reliance, per Family Court, the Supreme Court, exist.79, the High Court, The High Court, Court, Family Court, Sukhendu Das, the Apex Court, Public School, Biswas Rout, Company Law Board, The Supreme Court, the Trial Court, High Court

GPE: F.C., Utsav Vihar, Karala, Poonam, PW3 Pooja, RW1, life.83, L.J.made

TIME: every minute

LOC: Respondent

NORP: Sharma

PRODUCT: Respondent, Appellant