Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

J. Hippolite Vs. C. Stuart and anr.

Decided On : Jan-29-1886

Court : Kolkata

LAW: Section 8 of Act III, Section 8, Section 8, Section 10, Property Act, Section 12, Section 9, the Indian Act, Section 8, Section 12, Section 12, Section 9, Section 8, the Indian Act, Section 9.16, Section 9, Section 8, Section 8, Section 8, Section 8 and of Section 9, Section 9, Section 12, Section 12, the Succession Act, the Succession Act, Section 8, Section 8, Section 8.29, Section 10, Section 10, Section 9

PERSON: Richard Garth, Stuart, Stuart, Pugh, Sanger v. Sanger L.B., Sanger, Sanger, Sanger, William Hutchinson, William Hutchinson, Hutchinson.10, Lush, Hutchinson, Lush, Hutchinson, Hutchinson, Pugh, Allumuddy v. Braham I.L.R. 4 Cal, Wilson, J.22, Eomilly, Justice Lush, Peters v. Manuk, Pontifex, Justioe Pontifex

DATE: 1874, 1874, 1879, May, 1870, the 19th of January 1871, the same 19th January, earlier in the day, 1870, 1874, some years ago, c. 93, 1874, the thirty-first day of, December 1865

ORG: the Small Cause Court, the Married Woman's, Legislature, the Married Woman's, the English Courts, English Married Woman's, the Married Woman's, the Master of the Bolls, the Master of the Bolls, Court, the Court below.25, Court, The Court of Appeal, the Small Cause Court, the Court of Appeal, the Married Woman's

CARDINAL: 50,000, 11, 470, 300, 346.9, 1874.11, 846, 140.21

LANGUAGE: English, English

GPE: unmarried.14, Proviso

NORP: Indian

ORDINAL: first, first

FAC: the Transfer of Property Act

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