Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Somasundaram Vs. Thangaraju

Decided On : Jul-16-1996

Court : Chennai

Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]
Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]

LAW: Order 21, Rule 90, Section 151 of the Code, Order 43, Section 104(2, Section 104(2, Order 43, Rule 1, Order 39, Rule 1, Rule 1, Rule 2, Rule 2-A, Rule 4 or Rule 10, Order 39.Section 104, Order 43, Order 43, Section 104, Section 4, Section 104, Section 104(1, Section 104(1, Order 43, Section 104(1, Rule 72, Rule 92, Order 21, Section 4 of the Code, Section 4 and Section 104 of the Code, Section 4 of the Code, Section 4, Section 104(2, Order 41, Order 41, Order 41, Rule 10 of the Code, Section 39(1, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, Section 39(1, Section 39, the Arbitration Act, Section 100 of the Code, Section 39(1, the Arbitration Act, Section 39, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, Section 588, Section 104, Act X of 1940, the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 104 of the Code of, Section 39, Section 104(2, Order 21, Rule 90, Order 21, Rule 90, Section 104(2, Order 43, Rule 1, Section 104(2, Order 43, Rule 1 of the Code.18, the Division Bench, Section 104(2, Section 72, Section 72, Order 39, T.N.L.J. 92, Section 104(1, the Division Bench, Section 104(2, Section 100-A of the Code, Section 100-A, Section 104(2, the Amending Act, Section 104(1, Section 104(2

ORG: Srinivasan, the Executing Court, Court, the Executing Court, L.P. Appeal, Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, the Bombay High Court, the Supreme Court, The Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court, Court, S.N., the High Court, the City Civil Court, Section 104, the High Court, the Letters Patent, Court, L.P.A, the Supreme Court, Learned Counsel, the Supreme Court, Union of India, Mohindra Supply Co., S.N., Counsel, Division Benches, Court, Learned Counsel, the Privy Council, the Bombay High Court, Pandey-Mishra & Co., the Supreme Court, Court, the Supreme Court, Supreme Court, us.6, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the Subordinate Courts, the High Court, the Letters Patent, the Indian Legislature, the Indian Legislature, Section 104, Section 104, Court, Section 104, Section 104 of the Code, the Supreme Court, Letters Patent, the Indian Legislature, the Indian Legislature, the Privy Council, the Privy Council, The Judicial Committee, the Judicial Committee, Letters Patent Appeal, Next, the Supreme Court, Union of India, The Mohindra Supply Co., Court, Court, the Supreme Court, Letters Patent Appeal, Clause 10, The Supreme Court, Legislature, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Clauses, a Chartered High Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Indian Legislature, Letters, a Subordinate Court, the High Court, Court, Letters Patent Appeal, Clause 10, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Court, Clause 10, the Supreme Court, Letters Patent Appeal, S.N., the Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court, The Supreme Court, the Letters Patent, the Supreme Court, Court, Court, Bench, Court, Letters Patent, the High Court, Court, the Supreme Court, S.N., the Judgment of the Supreme Court, the Letter Patent, a Chartered High Court, The Mohindra Supply Co's, the Division Bench, the Supreme Court, The Mohindra Supply Co's, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, the Division Bench, Court, Boopathi Vijayaraghavan, the City Civil Court, the Bombay Public Trusts Act, the Gujarat High Court, Letters Patent Appeal, the Supreme Court, The Supreme Court, Judgment of the Division Bench, the Supreme Court, the City Civil Court, the Supreme Court, High Court, Division Bench, Court, the Supreme Court, Court, Court, Boopathi Vijayaraghavan's, Supreme Court, S.N., Supreme Court, Union of India, Mohindra Supply Co., the Letters Patent Appeal, Court, Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Learned Counsel, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Court, the High Court, the High Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, Bench, Court, the High Court, Letters, the Supreme Court, the Letters Patent Appeal, Court, Letters Patent, Letters Patent Appeal, Section 104, This Letters Patent Appeal, C.M.P., L.P.A., C.M.P.

NORP: J.1, Jayaben, Rukmani, Bunch

GPE: O.S., C.M.A., C.M.A., Resham, Singh, L.P.A., C.P.C., C.P.C., Bombay, Sabitri, Resham, Singh, C.M.A., case.19, Rukmani, A.I.R., S.C., Resham, Counsel

CARDINAL: 192, 775, 1(j, 1982]1SCR187, 2, 1(r, 1, 2, 1982]1SCR187, 1962]3SCR497, 1971]1SCR783, 1982]1SCR187, 1987]2SCR1083, 1996]2SCR906, 80, 14, 15, 44, 1, 2, one, 2, 2, 80, 14, 1962]3SCR497, 2, 1971]1SCR783, 1982]1SCR187, two, 1, 2, two, 1971]1SCR783, one, 1971]1SCR783, 1982]1SCR187, 1962]3SCR497, 1982]1SCR187, Three, 1962]3SCR497, Four, Four, Three, 1982]1SCR187, 1962]3SCR497, 92, 1987]2SCR1083, 1, 786, 94, 1962]3SCR497, two, two, 2, 55,000

DATE: 1974, 1986, 1984, 1921, 1940, 1899, 1877, 1908, 1940, 1908, 1908, 1908, 1984, 1908, 1984, 1984, 1981, 1996]2SCR906, 1976, 1976, 1992, the next day, 1992

PERSON: Singh Piyara, Abdul Sattar, Khimji v. Jayaban D. Kania, Khimji, Benches, Benches, Radhey Shyam v., Shyam Behari, Khimji v. Jayaban, Ramachandra G. Pandit, Charity Commr, Baddula Lakshmaiah v. Sri Anjaneya, Chettiar v., Radha Rukmani, Rukmani, H.N. Thirumalai, Counsel, Anil Upendra Pitale, Singh Pyara, Madan Naik, Hansubala Dei, order.10, Sabitri Thakaratin v. Savi, justified.12, Schedule 2 and, Patent.14, Radhey Shyam, Shyam Behari, Counsel, Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, Bench, Shyam, Radhey Shyam's, Madan Naik, Hansubhyala Devi, Boopathi Vijayaraghavan, Radha Rukmani, T.N.L.J., Bench, Bench, Bench, Bench, H.N. Thirumalai, Radha Rukmani, T.N.L.J., Ramachandra G. Pandit, Charity Commr, Ahmedabad, Pandey Mishra, Upendra Pitale : AIR1989Bom72, Rukmani, Thirumalai, Khimji v., H.N. Thirumalai, Singh Pyara, Singh v. Abdul Sattar, Bench, Bench, Baddula Lakshmaiah v. Sri Anjaneya, Bench, Counsel, Rs

EVENT: Clause 15, Clause 15, Clause 15, the Bombay Trusts Act, L.W. 91

ORDINAL: second, second, second, second, second, first, second, first, second, second

WORK_OF_ART: Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, Judgment under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, Amending Act 104 of 1976

PRODUCT: Judgment

View Full Judgment


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //