metadata

language:
  - en
license: apache-2.0
tags:
  - sentence-transformers
  - sentence-similarity
  - feature-extraction
  - generated_from_trainer
  - dataset_size:132576
  - loss:MatryoshkaLoss
  - loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
base_model: Alibaba-NLP/gte-base-en-v1.5
widget:
  - source_sentence: >-
      In what circumstances can the permission to pay turnover tax under Section
      7 of the KGST Act be challenged or rectified?
    sentences:
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Amalgamation of LLPs:** The case revolves around the proposed Scheme
        of Amalgamation of two Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs), Alps Trade
        Com LLP (Transferee) and Lubstor Trade Com LLP (Transferor), under
        Section 60-62 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008.

        * **Approval of Scheme:** The main legal issue is the Tribunal's
        approval of the proposed Scheme of Amalgamation, which involves the
        transfer of assets, liabilities, and rights of the Transferor LLP to the
        Transferee LLP.

        * **Compliance with LLP Act:** The court considered the compliance of
        the LLPs with the provisions of the Limited Liability Partnership Act,
        2008, including the requirement for consent from partners, creditors,
        and other stakeholders.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The Transferee LLP, Alps Trade Com LLP, has 4 partners, and the
        Transferor LLP, Lubstor Trade Com LLP, has 3 partners.

        * The Transferor LLP has NIL creditors, and the Transferee LLP has one
        major creditor, Yaduka Agrotech Private Limited, which has given its no
        objection to the proposed merger.

        * The Scheme of Amalgamation has been approved by the partners and
        creditors of both LLPs.

        * The Tribunal has dispensed with the requirement of holding separate
        meetings of partners and creditors of both LLPs.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The Tribunal has approved the Scheme of Amalgamation under Section
        60-62 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008.

        * The Tribunal has dispensed with the requirement of holding separate
        meetings of partners and creditors of both LLPs.

        * The LLPs are required to serve notice to the Registrar of Companies,
        West Bengal, the Official Liquidator, and the Income-Tax Assessing
        Officer within 7 days from the date of the order.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008** (Sections 60-62)
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Alternate Method of Taxation:** The case revolves around the
        applicability of the alternate method of taxation under Section 7 of the
        Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.

        * **Section 7 of KGST Act:** The main legal issue is the interpretation
        of Section 7 of the KGST Act, which provides for payment of tax at a
        compounded rate.

        * **Assessment Year:** The court considered the issue of whether the
        amended provisions of the Kerala Finance Act, 2001, which came into
        effect from 23-7-2001, were applicable for Assessment Year 2001-2002.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The appellant, M/s Varkisons Engineers, is a partnership firm with a
        crushing unit at Kadiyiruppu, Kolenchery, Ernakulam District.

        * The appellant opted to pay turnover tax under Section 7 of the KGST
        Act for Assessment Year 2001-2002.

        * The assessing authority granted permission to the appellant to pay tax
        under Section 7 on 9-4-2001.

        * The Finance Act, 2001, enhanced the rate per machine from Rs 30,000 to
        Rs 90,000 from 23-7-2001.

        * The appellant challenged the notice issued under Section 43 of the
        KGST Act seeking to rectify the permission/order dated 9-4-2001 and
        seeking an enhanced rate per machine with effect from 23-7-2001.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment dated 4-10-2007 and
        restored Original Petition No. 1501 of 2003 to the file of the Kerala
        High Court for de novo consideration.

        * The court held that the Surcharge Act, 1957, was not retrospective in
        operation and could not be regarded as law in force at the commencement
        of the year of Assessment 1957-1958.

        * The court also referred to the judgment of this Court in CIT v.
        Isthmian Steamship Lines, where it was held that the law to be applied
        is the law in force in the assessment year, unless otherwise stated or
        implied.

        * The civil appeal stands disposed of accordingly, with all contentions
        expressly kept open.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **State of Kerala v. Builders Assn. of India**, (1997) 2 SCC 183

        * **Mycon Construction Ltd. v. State of Karnataka**, (2003) 9 SCC 583

        * **Mathuram Agrawal v. State of M.P.**, (1999) 8 SCC 667

        * **Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala**, AIR 1966 SC 1385
        : (1966) 60 ITR 262

        * **CST v. Modi Sugar Mills Ltd.**, AIR 1961 SC 1047 : (1961) 2 SCR 189
        : (1961) 12 STC 182
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Existence of Dispute:** The main legal issue is whether there was an
        existence of dispute prior to the issuance of the Demand Notice dated
        11.04.2019.

        * **Section 8 of IBC:** The court considered the application of Section
        8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which deals with the
        requirement of a dispute to be raised by the corporate debtor in
        response to a demand notice.

        * **Admissibility of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP):**
        The court's ruling affected the admissibility of the CIRP against the
        corporate debtor.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The corporate debtor, Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd., had a pre-existing
        dispute with the operational creditor, Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

        * The operational creditor issued a demand notice dated 11.04.2019,
        which was received by the corporate debtor on 16.04.2019.

        * The corporate debtor raised disputes through e-mails dated 04.10.2018,
        01.11.2018, and 04.12.2018, among others.

        * The corporate debtor also pointed out discrepancies in the billed and
        actual executed work through e-mails dated 05.11.2018 and 29.04.2019.

        * The parties exchanged several e-mails and letters regarding the
        completion of the work and deficiency in services, indicating a
        pre-existing dispute.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The NCLAT (National Company Law Appellate Tribunal) allowed the appeal
        and set aside the Impugned Order dated 04.06.2020 passed by the learned
        Adjudicating Authority.

        * The court held that the corporate debtor had raised disputes prior to
        the issuance of the demand notice, making the initiation of the CIRP
        against the corporate debtor invalid.

        * The court quashed the steps taken in consequence of the Impugned Order
        and released the corporate debtor from the rigour of the Corporate
        Insolvency Resolution Process.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Mobilox Innovations Private Limited v. Kirusa Software Private
        Limited** (2018) 1 SCC 353

        * **Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank** (2018) 1 SCC 407

        * **Vinod Mittal v. Rays Power Exports** (Company Appeal (AT)
        (Insolvency) No. 851/2019 dated 18.11.2019)

        * **Gajendra Parihar v. Devi Industrial Engineers** (Company Appeal (AT)
        (Insolvency) No. 1370 of 2019 dated 18.03.2020)
  - source_sentence: >-
      How does the court determine the adequacy of shareholder approval in
      corporate amalgamations?
    sentences:
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Trademark Infringement:** The primary legal issue is whether the
        term "Split View" can be considered a trademark or is merely descriptive
        of a software feature.

        * **Prior Use:** The court considered whether Apple Inc. or the
        respondents (Rohit Singh and Vyooh Low Level Computing LLP) had prior
        use of the term "Split View" as a trademark.

        * **Passing Off:** The court examined whether Apple's use of "Split
        View" constitutes passing off, given the distinction between a product
        and a feature within an operating system.

        * **Descriptive Use vs. Trademark Use:** The court evaluated whether
        "Split View" is a descriptive term or a trademark, noting that if it is
        merely descriptive, it cannot be claimed as a trademark.

        * **Distinctiveness:** The court assessed whether the term "Split View"
        had acquired a secondary meaning or distinctiveness, thereby qualifying
        as a trademark.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * Rohit Singh developed a software product called "Split View" in 2005,
        which allowed users to simultaneously work on multiple windows on their
        computer screen.

        * Apple Inc. launched an update to their operating system (Mac OS X El
        Capitan and iOS 9) in December 2015, which included a feature called
        "Split View."

        * Rohit Singh claimed that Apple's use of "Split View" infringed on his
        trademark and sought relief from Apple.

        * Apple argued that "Split View" is a descriptive term used by various
        software developers and not a trademark.

        * Apple highlighted that its use of "Split View" is integrated within
        its operating system and not sold as a standalone product.

        * Apple provided examples of other entities using "Split View" to
        describe multi-window functionality.

        * The court noted that the respondents had established prior use of the
        term "Split View" as a trademark for their software product.

        * The court recognized the distinction between a product and a feature
        within an operating system, which is relevant to the passing off claim.

        * The court found that the term "Split View" was used descriptively and
        not as a trademark by either party.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The High Court vacated the ex-parte interim order granted by the
        learned Single Judge.

        * The court directed Apple to file a written statement.

        * The court noted that the respondents had established prior use of the
        term "Split View" as a trademark for their software product.

        * The court recognized the distinction between a product and a feature
        within an operating system, which is relevant to the passing off claim.

        * The court concluded that the term "Split View" is descriptive and
        cannot be claimed as a trademark by either party.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Kavi Raj Pandit v. Durga Dutt Sharma**, AIR 1965 SC 1980

        * **Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Radico Khaitan Ltd.**, 2012 (49) PTC 54

        * **Automatic Electric v. R.K. Dhawan**, 57 (1995) DLT 49

        * **Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah**, (2002) 3 SCC 65

        * **Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing
        Federation Ltd.**, ILR (2010) II Del 85

        * **Uniply Industries Ltd. v. Karnataka Industrial Development
        Corporation**, (2001) 5 SCC 95, AIR 2001 SC 2083
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Amalgamation of Companies:** The case revolves around the proposed
        amalgamation between Crown Beers India Private Limited (Transferor
        Company) and Anheuser Busch InBev India Limited (Transferee Company)
        under sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013.

        * **Scheme of Amalgamation:** The main legal issue is the approval of
        the Scheme of Amalgamation, which includes the transfer of assets and
        liabilities from the Transferor Company to the Transferee Company.

        * **Shareholder Approval:** The court considered the requirements for
        shareholder approval, including the notice period, proxy voting, and
        quorum.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The Transferor Company is engaged in the business of manufacturing,
        brewing, packaging, distribution, marketing, sale, export, and import of
        beer, liquor, and other alcoholic products.

        * The Scheme provides for the issuance of new equity shares by the
        Transferee Company to the equity shareholders of the Transferor Company.

        * The Scheme also provides for the transfer of assets and liabilities
        from the Transferor Company to the Transferee Company.

        * There are no secured creditors, but there are approximately 1,250
        unsecured creditors.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The Tribunal directed the Applicant Company to issue notices to the
        equity shareholders, unsecured creditors, and regulatory authorities.

        * The Tribunal also directed the Applicant Company to serve notices to
        the concerned Income Tax Authority and the Central Government.

        * The Tribunal dispensed with the meeting of the creditors and directed
        the Applicant Company to file an affidavit of service.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Companies Act, 2013**

        * **Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules,
        2016**
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Amalgamation of Companies:** The case revolves around the proposed
        amalgamation of Fizza Plastics Private Limited (Transferor Company) with
        Krypton Datamatics Limited (Transferee Company) under Sections 230-232
        of the Companies Act, 2013.

        * **Scheme of Amalgamation:** The court considered the applicability of
        the Scheme of Amalgamation, including its compliance with the Accounting
        Standards and the requirements of the Companies Act, 2013.

        * **Dispensation of Convening Meetings:** The court held that the
        requirement of convening meetings of shareholders and creditors can be
        dispensed with, considering the consent of shareholders and creditors.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The Transferor Company and Transferee Company are incorporated under
        the Companies Act, 2013.

        * The registered offices of both companies are situated in the National
        Capital Territory of Delhi.

        * The Scheme of Amalgamation is necessitated by the consolidation of the
        businesses, strategic and competitive advantages, economies of scale,
        and better utilization of skilled manpower.

        * The Share Exchange Ratio has been determined in accordance with the
        Report on Valuation of Shares & Share Exchange Ratio dated 5th December
        2017.

        * The Board of Directors of each company has unanimously approved the
        proposed Scheme of Amalgamation.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court allowed the application for dispensing with the requirement
        of convening meetings of shareholders and creditors of the applicant
        companies.

        * The court directed the applicant companies to comply with the
        applicable law, including forms and formats contained in the Companies
        (Compromises, Arrangements, Amalgamations) Rules, 2016.

        * The court also directed the applicant companies to send notices to the
        Central Government, Income Tax Authorities, Registrar of Companies, and
        other sectoral regulators or authorities as required under sub-section
        (5) of section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013.


        **4. Citations:**


        * Companies Act, 2013

        * Companies (Compromises, Arrangements, and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016
  - source_sentence: >-
      Under what circumstances can a government servant be prosecuted without
      obtaining prior sanction as per Section 197 CrPC?
    sentences:
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Share Transfer and Acquisition:** The case revolves around the
        alleged illegal transfer and acquisition of shares by Respondent No. 2
        from Respondents 5-12, which diluted the shareholding of the Petitioner.

        * **Section 108 of the Company Act 1956:** The main legal issue is the
        application of Section 108, which deals with the transfer of shares, and
        whether the transfer was made without the previous sanction of the
        Directors.

        * **Articles of Association:** The court considered the provisions of
        the Articles of Association, particularly Article No. of the AOA, which
        permits member-to-member transfers.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The Respondent company was incorporated on 29.5.2007 with 1,50,000
        shares held equally by the three initial promoters.

        * The company acquired a property in Goa, and to raise finances for
        development, further allotment of 90,000 shares was made at a premium to
        third parties.

        * Respondent No. 2 purchased an adjoining piece of land for Rs. 1.2
        crores and proposed to amalgamate it with the project.

        * The Petitioner alleges that Respondent No. 2 was in control of the
        company's affairs and had not transferred the plot of 300 sq. meters to
        the company.

        * The Respondent company's bank account is jointly operated, and the
        security advance received from the Lessee has been spent on renovations
        and additions.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court dismissed the petition on grounds of limitation and lack of
        merit.

        * The court held that the acquisition of shares by Respondent No. 2 was
        not illegal, as it was a member-to-member transfer permitted under the
        Articles of Association.

        * The court found that the Petitioner had knowledge of the acquisition
        and had not objected to it, giving rise to the inference of his consent.

        * The court also found that the Respondent company's management
        decisions, including the leasing of the property, were not oppressive or
        mismanaged.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Section 108 of the Company Act 1956**

        * **Articles of Association of the Company**

        * **Precedents under the Companies Act 2013**
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Section 196 CrPC:** Whether the court can take cognizance of an
        offense committed by a police officer while acting in the discharge of
        his official duties without sanction.

        * **Section 197 CrPC:** Whether a government servant can be prosecuted
        without sanction.

        * **Protection of Public Servants:** The court balanced the need to
        protect public servants in the discharge of their duties while also
        emphasizing the protection of citizens' rights.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The petitioner, Bakhshish Singh Brar, a Deputy Superintendent of
        Police, was accused of causing grievous injuries and death during a raid
        and search.

        * The case was committed to the Court of Sessions by the Judicial
        Magistrate First Class, Kapurthala.

        * The complainant, Gurmej Kaur, alleged that the petitioner and his
        police party had attacked her and her sons, Ajit Singh and Manjit Singh,
        who were later killed.

        * The respondent's case was that the police party was conducting a raid
        on a haveli in connection with illicit liquor and unlicensed arms.

        * The court noted that the two versions of the incident were in
        conflict.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court held that the trial could proceed without sanction under
        Section 196 CrPC.

        * The court observed that the question of whether the petitioner
        exceeded his official capacity while acting in the discharge of his
        duties could only be determined after some evidence had been noted by
        the trial court.

        * The court allowed the trial to proceed as expeditiously as possible
        and directed that the question of sanction under Section 197 CrPC may be
        agitated after some evidence had been noted by the learned Additional
        Sessions Judge.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Pukhraj v. State of Rajasthan**, (1973) 2 SCC 701 : 1973 SCC (Cri)
        944 : (1974) 1 SCR 559
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Circumstantial Evidence:** The case revolves around the use of
        circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused under
        Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

        * **Dying Declaration:** The admissibility of the oral dying declaration
        made by the deceased to P.Ws.1 and 2 is a crucial issue.

        * **Extra-Judicial Confession:** The evidence of P.W.7 regarding the
        extra-judicial confession made by the accused is significant.

        * **Recovery of Materials:** The recovery of materials of evidence, such
        as blood-stained clothes and weapons, is also an issue.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The deceased was cutting tapioca plants on the accused's land, which
        led to a quarrel and subsequent assault by the accused.

        * The accused beat the deceased with a stick and inflicted cut injuries
        with a sickle, leaving him with 15 external injuries and fractures in
        the skull, right leg, and left elbow.

        * The deceased was tied with a nylon rope and left bleeding, and the
        accused fled the scene.

        * P.Ws.1 and 2 found the accused with blood-stained clothes and reported
        the incident to the police.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The High Court upheld the conviction of the accused under Section 302
        of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

        * The court rejected the accused's plea for sympathy and modification of
        the conviction and sentence.

        * The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Gentela Vijayavardhan Rao v. State of A.P.**, (1996) (6) SCC 241

        * **Namdeo Daulata Dhayagude v. State of Maharashtra**, (1976) (4) SCC
        441

        * **Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P.**, AIR 1990 SC 709

        * **Puran Singh v. State of Punjab**, 1995 Supp (3) SCC 665

        * **Rattan Singh v. State of H.P.**, (1997) (4) SCC 161


        **Additional Key Points:**


        * The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, which must satisfy
        the tests laid down in Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P. (AIR 1990 SC
        709).

        * The accused's motive was established through the evidence of P.Ws.1,
        2, and 7, showing the accused had a grudge against the deceased for
        cutting the tapioca plants.

        * The oral dying declaration of the deceased to P.Ws.1 and 2 was
        corroborated by the medical evidence and other circumstances, making it
        reliable.

        * The accused's extra-judicial confession to P.W.7 was significant,
        along with the recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapons.

        * The accused's sentence was upheld, and he was sentenced to life
        imprisonment.


        **Refined Summary:**


        The case revolves around the murder of the deceased by the accused, who
        was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The
        prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the oral dying
        declaration of the deceased, the accused's extra-judicial confession,
        and the recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapons. The court upheld
        the conviction and sentence, rejecting the accused's plea for sympathy
        and modification. The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment.
  - source_sentence: >-
      How does the court assess the significance of the recovery of firearms and
      cartridges from the accused at the crime scene in establishing a
      conspiracy to commit murder?
    sentences:
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Tenancy and Land Laws:** The case revolves around the interpretation
        of tenancy rights under the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939, and the U.P.
        Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950.

        * **Bhumidari Rights:** The main legal issue is the applicability of
        Section 182(2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939, which deals with the
        extinguishment of a female tenant's rights upon marriage and the
        consequent hereditary tenancy rights of the person in possession.

        * **Possession and Sirdari Rights:** The court considered the question
        of whether Chhanoo, the respondent, had acquired sirdari rights through
        adverse possession or as a representative of Mst Sundariya, the original
        tenant.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * Mst Sundariya, the original tenant, died, and Chhanoo, her guardian,
        managed the property.

        * Mst Sundariya obtained bhumidari rights in the plots in question by
        depositing ten times the rent.

        * She sold the plots to the plaintiff, and Chhanoo claimed rights on the
        land.

        * The revenue entries showed that Chhanoo was the guardian of Mst
        Sundariya, and he continued to manage the property.

        * Mst Sundariya continued to be shown as a tenant in the revenue
        records, and Chhanoo did not take any action to correct the entries or
        claim adverse possession.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court upheld the finding of the first appellate court that
        Chhanoo's possession was always as a representative or de facto guardian
        of Mst Sundariya.

        * The court held that Chhanoo did not acquire any title by way of
        adverse possession and was not entitled to sirdari rights.

        * The court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High
        Court, restoring the order of the first appellate court.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939**

        * **U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950**

        * **Section 182(2) of the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939**

        * **Section 36 of the Tenancy Act**

        * **Section 134 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act,
        1950**

        * **Section 137 and 137-A of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land
        Reforms Act, 1950**
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Murder and Attempted Murder:** The case revolves around allegations
        of murder and attempted murder of Dr. Satya Prakash Dubey and his wife
        Smt. Manorma Dubey, and injuries to Umesh Chandra Mishra and Munnu
        Singh.

        * **Section 302 and 307 IPC:** The main legal issue is the application
        of Section 302 (punishment for murder) and Section 307 (attempt to
        murder) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

        * **Arms Act:** The court also considered the application of the Arms
        Act, specifically Section 25, which deals with the unlawful possession
        of firearms.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The occurrence took place on August 8, 1982, at the residence of Dr.
        Satya Prakash Dubey in Etawah.

        * Dr. Dubey and his wife Smt. Manorma Dubey were found dead, while Umesh
        Chandra Mishra and Munnu Singh were injured.

        * The accused, Brijendra Kumar, Ashok Dixit, and Chaman Lal, were
        apprehended at the scene, and firearms and cartridges were recovered
        from them.

        * The prosecution case was that the accused had conspired to murder Dr.
        Dubey and his wife, and had attempted to murder the injured individuals.

        * The defense argued that the accused were innocent and that the
        prosecution had failed to prove their guilt.

        * The investigating officer failed to record the statements of eye
        witnesses, including Umesh Chandra Mishra, Km. Ritu, Munnu Singh, and
        Bhagwat Dayal Dubey, on the night of the occurrence.

        * The accused persons were not interrogated on the night of the
        occurrence, and the investigating officer recorded their statements in
        the morning of 9-8-1982.

        * The First Information Report (FIR) was allegedly founded on the
        information furnished by Munnu Singh, one of the injured, but Munnu
        Singh was not examined as a witness to corroborate the version in the
        FIR.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The High Court has acquitted the accused, Brijendra Kumar, Ashok
        Dixit, and Chaman Lal, due to lack of credible evidence.

        * The court has observed that the investigation was marred by several
        irregularities and that the evidence presented by the prosecution was
        unreliable.

        * The court has also noted that the investigating officer and other
        police personnel had conducted themselves in a manner that raised doubts
        about the prosecution case.


        **4. Citations:**


        * The case does not seem to be a precedent-setting case, but the court
        has considered the judgments of the Apex Court in other cases while
        delivering its verdict.
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Occupier of a Factory:** The main legal issue is the interpretation
        of who can be considered the occupier of a factory, particularly in the
        case of a company.

        * **Ultimate Control:** The court holds that a company, which owns or
        runs a factory, cannot nominate any employee or officer, except a
        director, as the occupier of the factory.

        * **Proviso (ii) to Section 2(n) of the Factories Act, 1948:** The court
        upholds the validity of the proviso, which provides a deeming fiction
        that a director of a company shall be deemed to be the occupier in case
        of a company.

        * **Vicarious Liability:** The court affirms the principle of vicarious
        liability, holding that the occupier (director) is responsible for the
        actions of the manager and actual offenders in the factory.

        * **Strict Liability:** The court upholds the principle of strict
        liability, where the occupier is liable for the contravention of
        provisions under the Act, even without mens rea.

        * **Section 101 as an Exception:** The court holds that Section 101 of
        the Act provides an exception to the principle of strict liability,
        allowing the occupier to extricate himself from liability by
        establishing that the actual offender is someone else.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The case revolves around the interpretation of Section 2(n) of the
        Factories Act, 1948, and the proviso (ii) added in 1987.

        * The court considers the legislative history of the amendment and the
        Statement of Objects and Reasons.

        * The court refers to various judgments, including M.C. Mehta (II) v.
        Union of India, to understand the context of the amendment.

        * The Chief Inspector of Factories directed the petitioners/appellants
        to file applications seeking renewal of the registration of licence of
        their respective factories, signed by a director of the company in his
        capacity as the occupier of the factory.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The Supreme Court upholds the validity of proviso (ii) to Section 2(n)
        of the Factories Act, 1948.

        * The court holds that a company, which owns or runs a factory, cannot
        nominate any employee or officer, except a director, as the occupier of
        the factory.

        * The court affirms the directions given by the Chief Inspector of
        Factories to the writ petitioners and the appellants, stating that only
        a director of the company can file an application for renewal of the
        factory licence.

        * The court also holds that Section 101 of the Act provides an exception
        to the principle of strict liability, allowing the occupier to extricate
        himself from liability by establishing that the actual offender is
        someone else.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **M.C. Mehta (II) v. Union of India**, (1986) 2 SCC 325

        * **John Donald Mackenzie v. Chief Inspector of Factories**, AIR 1962 SC
        1351

        * **Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. v. Nattrass**, 1972 AC 153

        * **Lennard's Carrying Co. Ltd. v. Asiatic Petroleum Co. Ltd.**, 1915 AC
        705

        * **Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co.
        Ltd.**, (1984) 4 SCC 444

        * **S. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P.**, (1995) 6 SCC 738

        * **CIT v. Indo Mercantile Bank Ltd.**, (1999) 2 SCC 76

        * **State of Gujarat v. Kansara Manilal Bhikalal**, (AIR at p. 1897)

        * **Maneklal Jinabhai Kot v. State of Gujarat**, (approved by a
        three-Judge Bench of this Court)
  - source_sentence: >-
      What role does the liquidator play in verifying the claims and charges of
      secured creditors during the liquidation of a corporate debtor?
    sentences:
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Priority of Charges:** The main legal issue is the priority of
        charges on the secured assets of the corporate debtor, Reid and Taylor
        India Ltd.

        * **Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:** The court considered the
        provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, particularly
        Section 52 and Regulation 37 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of
        India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.

        * **Security Interest:** The court examined the security interest held
        by the applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P. Ltd., and other
        financial creditors, including Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.

        * **Entitlement to Realize Security Interest:** The court held that the
        applicant is entitled to realize their security interest in the manner
        specified under Section 52(1)(b) read with Regulation 37 of the IBBI
        (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P. Ltd., is a secured
        creditor with a first pari passu charge on the immovable fixed assets of
        the corporate debtor.

        * Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. is also a secured creditor
        with a claim on the same assets.

        * The corporate debtor, Reid and Taylor India Ltd., has been under
        liquidation.

        * Suit No. 84 of 2013 is pending in the Civil Judge (Senior Division),
        Nanjangud, challenging the first charge created by IDM.

        * The liquidator has verified the documents and found that the applicant
        is the sole first charge holder of the immovable property of the
        corporate debtor at Mysore.

        * The Edelweiss had not obtained an NOC from the IDM and had not
        ventilated their grievance or enforced their rights before any forum.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court ruled that the applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P.
        Ltd., is entitled to realize their security interest in the manner
        specified under Section 52(1)(b) read with Regulation 37 of the IBBI
        (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.

        * The court held that the applicant is the first charge holder of the
        immovable fixed assets of the corporate debtor.

        * The court dismissed the objection of Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction
        Co. Ltd. regarding the priority of charges.

        * The court directed the liquidator to hand over the symbolic possession
        of the fixed assets of the corporate debtor to the applicant to enable
        them to proceed with the sale of the assets.

        * The court directed the liquidator to inform the Tribunal about the
        manner and progress of the sale of assets from time-to-time for further
        directions/instructions.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016**

        * **Regulation 37 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India
        (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016**

        * **Suit No. 84 of 2013 filed with the Court of Civil Judge (Senior
        Division), Nanjangud, Karnataka**
      - >-
        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Dowry and Cruelty:** The case revolves around allegations of dowry
        demands and cruelty by the husband (petitioner) towards his wife.

        * **Section 498-A IPC:** The main legal issue is the application of
        Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which deals with cruelty
        by the husband or his relatives towards a married woman.

        * **Sentencing:** The court considered the appropriateness of the
        sentence awarded to the petitioner under Section 498-A IPC.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The petitioner, Mangat Ram, was convicted under Section 498-A IPC.

        * He was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a fine.

        * He appealed the conviction and sentence, which was dismissed.

        * He then filed a revision petition, seeking a reduction in sentence.

        * The petitioner had already served over two months in prison.

        * The complainant (wife) had obtained an ex-parte divorce decree.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The High Court upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Section
        498-A IPC.

        * The court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the
        petitioner.

        * The court enhanced the fine to Rs. 5000/-.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Yogendra Yadav v. State of Jharkhand**, Criminal Appeal No. 1205 of
        2014

        * **Lajpat Rai v. State of Haryana**, Criminal Revision No. 1380 of 1999


        **Refined Summary (Updated):**


        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Default Bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.:** The court considered
        the applicability of default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in cases
        where the investigating agency fails to file the final report within the
        prescribed time limit.

        * **Investigation and Filing of Challan:** The court held that the
        investigation is not considered incomplete merely because the
        investigating officer awaits reports of experts or fails to append
        certain documents to the police report.

        * **Role of the Court:** The court emphasized its role in determining
        whether to permit the prosecutor to adduce evidence of experts and to
        balance the interest of the accused with the interest of justice.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The petitioners, Sukhwinder Kumar @ Sukha, Harpreet Singh @ Bahadur,
        Navjit Singh, and Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha, were accused of offenses under
        the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.

        * They filed revision petitions seeking default bail under Section
        167(2) Cr.P.C.

        * The prosecution opposed their claims, arguing that the investigating
        agency had not failed to file the final report within the prescribed
        time limit.

        * The court considered the rival contentions and held that the
        petitioners were entitled to default bail.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The court disposed of the revision petitions, releasing the
        petitioners on interim bail till the filing of the report under Section
        173 Cr.P.C.

        * The court emphasized the importance of the investigating agency and
        the prosecuting agency complying with statutory provisions to avoid
        delay in completing investigations and filing challans.

        * The court noted that the respondent-State had failed to comply with
        statutory provisions, resulting in the accused getting benefit of
        default bail.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Abdul Azeez P.V. v. National Investigation Agency**, 2015 (1) RCR
        (Criminal) 239

        * **Mehal Singh v. State of Haryana**, 1978 PLR 480
      - >-
        **Refined Summary:**


        **1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**


        * **Public Purpose:** The main legal issue is the interpretation of the
        public purpose for which land was acquired under the Land Acquisition
        Act, 1894.

        * **Section 4 and 6:** The court considered the validity of
        notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act.

        * **Land Acquisition:** The court held that the public purpose of
        acquiring land for planned development of the expanding town of Greater
        Delhi remained the same, despite the introduction of the Master Plan.


        **2. Significant Facts of the Case:**


        * The case involves the acquisition of land for the execution of the
        Interim General Plan for Greater Delhi.

        * The Master Plan for Delhi came into force on September 1, 1962,
        replacing the Interim General Plan.

        * The respondents contended that the public purpose indicated in the
        declaration under Section 6 ceased to be operative after the
        introduction of the Master Plan.

        * The appellants argued that the public purpose remained the same, i.e.,
        the planned development of the expanding town of Greater Delhi.


        **3. Court's Ruling:**


        * The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the
        Delhi High Court.

        * The court held that the public purpose of acquiring land remained the
        same, despite the introduction of the Master Plan.

        * The court directed the parties to bear their own costs.


        **4. Citations:**


        * **Babu Singh v. Union of India**, (1981) 3 SCC 628
pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
library_name: sentence-transformers
metrics:
  - cosine_accuracy@1
  - cosine_accuracy@3
  - cosine_accuracy@5
  - cosine_accuracy@10
  - cosine_precision@1
  - cosine_precision@3
  - cosine_precision@5
  - cosine_precision@10
  - cosine_recall@1
  - cosine_recall@3
  - cosine_recall@5
  - cosine_recall@10
  - cosine_ndcg@10
  - cosine_mrr@10
  - cosine_map@100
model-index:
  - name: GTE-base Votum Case Law
    results:
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 768
          type: dim_768
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.0824018343364861
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.24835196331327028
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.33935224992834623
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4760676411579249
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.0824018343364861
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.08278398777109008
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.06787044998566925
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.04760676411579248
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.0824018343364861
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.24835196331327028
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.33935224992834623
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.4760676411579249
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.2582198876800978
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.19086027742519565
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.20176101999097426
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 512
          type: dim_512
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.07781599312123817
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.235024362281456
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.32745772427629694
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4656061908856406
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.07781599312123817
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.07834145409381867
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.06549154485525939
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.046560619088564056
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.07781599312123817
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.235024362281456
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.32745772427629694
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.4656061908856406
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.25020804232360305
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.1837239601104605
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.19468382782021346
            name: Cosine Map@100

GTE-base Votum Case Law

This is a sentence-transformers model finetuned from Alibaba-NLP/gte-base-en-v1.5 on the json dataset. It maps sentences & paragraphs to a 768-dimensional dense vector space and can be used for semantic textual similarity, semantic search, paraphrase mining, text classification, clustering, and more.

Model Details

Model Description

Model Type: Sentence Transformer
Base model: Alibaba-NLP/gte-base-en-v1.5
Maximum Sequence Length: 8192 tokens
Output Dimensionality: 768 dimensions
Similarity Function: Cosine Similarity
Training Dataset:
- json
Language: en
License: apache-2.0

Model Sources

Documentation: Sentence Transformers Documentation
Repository: Sentence Transformers on GitHub
Hugging Face: Sentence Transformers on Hugging Face

Full Model Architecture

SentenceTransformer(
  (0): Transformer({'max_seq_length': 8192, 'do_lower_case': False}) with Transformer model: NewModel 
  (1): Pooling({'word_embedding_dimension': 768, 'pooling_mode_cls_token': True, 'pooling_mode_mean_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_max_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_mean_sqrt_len_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_weightedmean_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_lasttoken': False, 'include_prompt': True})
)

Usage

Direct Usage (Sentence Transformers)

First install the Sentence Transformers library:

pip install -U sentence-transformers

Then you can load this model and run inference.

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer

# Download from the 🤗 Hub
model = SentenceTransformer("Tejasw1/votum-case-law-v1")
# Run inference
sentences = [
    'What role does the liquidator play in verifying the claims and charges of secured creditors during the liquidation of a corporate debtor?',
    "**1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**\n\n* **Priority of Charges:** The main legal issue is the priority of charges on the secured assets of the corporate debtor, Reid and Taylor India Ltd.\n* **Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:** The court considered the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, particularly Section 52 and Regulation 37 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.\n* **Security Interest:** The court examined the security interest held by the applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P. Ltd., and other financial creditors, including Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.\n* **Entitlement to Realize Security Interest:** The court held that the applicant is entitled to realize their security interest in the manner specified under Section 52(1)(b) read with Regulation 37 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.\n\n**2. Significant Facts of the Case:**\n\n* The applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P. Ltd., is a secured creditor with a first pari passu charge on the immovable fixed assets of the corporate debtor.\n* Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. is also a secured creditor with a claim on the same assets.\n* The corporate debtor, Reid and Taylor India Ltd., has been under liquidation.\n* Suit No. 84 of 2013 is pending in the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nanjangud, challenging the first charge created by IDM.\n* The liquidator has verified the documents and found that the applicant is the sole first charge holder of the immovable property of the corporate debtor at Mysore.\n* The Edelweiss had not obtained an NOC from the IDM and had not ventilated their grievance or enforced their rights before any forum.\n\n**3. Court's Ruling:**\n\n* The court ruled that the applicant, Finquest Financial Solutions P. Ltd., is entitled to realize their security interest in the manner specified under Section 52(1)(b) read with Regulation 37 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.\n* The court held that the applicant is the first charge holder of the immovable fixed assets of the corporate debtor.\n* The court dismissed the objection of Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. regarding the priority of charges.\n* The court directed the liquidator to hand over the symbolic possession of the fixed assets of the corporate debtor to the applicant to enable them to proceed with the sale of the assets.\n* The court directed the liquidator to inform the Tribunal about the manner and progress of the sale of assets from time-to-time for further directions/instructions.\n\n**4. Citations:**\n\n* **Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016**\n* **Regulation 37 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016**\n* **Suit No. 84 of 2013 filed with the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nanjangud, Karnataka**",
    "**1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**\n\n* **Dowry and Cruelty:** The case revolves around allegations of dowry demands and cruelty by the husband (petitioner) towards his wife.\n* **Section 498-A IPC:** The main legal issue is the application of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which deals with cruelty by the husband or his relatives towards a married woman.\n* **Sentencing:** The court considered the appropriateness of the sentence awarded to the petitioner under Section 498-A IPC.\n\n**2. Significant Facts of the Case:**\n\n* The petitioner, Mangat Ram, was convicted under Section 498-A IPC.\n* He was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a fine.\n* He appealed the conviction and sentence, which was dismissed.\n* He then filed a revision petition, seeking a reduction in sentence.\n* The petitioner had already served over two months in prison.\n* The complainant (wife) had obtained an ex-parte divorce decree.\n\n**3. Court's Ruling:**\n\n* The High Court upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Section 498-A IPC.\n* The court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by the petitioner.\n* The court enhanced the fine to Rs. 5000/-.\n\n**4. Citations:**\n\n* **Yogendra Yadav v. State of Jharkhand**, Criminal Appeal No. 1205 of 2014\n* **Lajpat Rai v. State of Haryana**, Criminal Revision No. 1380 of 1999\n\n**Refined Summary (Updated):**\n\n**1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings:**\n\n* **Default Bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.:** The court considered the applicability of default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in cases where the investigating agency fails to file the final report within the prescribed time limit.\n* **Investigation and Filing of Challan:** The court held that the investigation is not considered incomplete merely because the investigating officer awaits reports of experts or fails to append certain documents to the police report.\n* **Role of the Court:** The court emphasized its role in determining whether to permit the prosecutor to adduce evidence of experts and to balance the interest of the accused with the interest of justice.\n\n**2. Significant Facts of the Case:**\n\n* The petitioners, Sukhwinder Kumar @ Sukha, Harpreet Singh @ Bahadur, Navjit Singh, and Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha, were accused of offenses under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.\n* They filed revision petitions seeking default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.\n* The prosecution opposed their claims, arguing that the investigating agency had not failed to file the final report within the prescribed time limit.\n* The court considered the rival contentions and held that the petitioners were entitled to default bail.\n\n**3. Court's Ruling:**\n\n* The court disposed of the revision petitions, releasing the petitioners on interim bail till the filing of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.\n* The court emphasized the importance of the investigating agency and the prosecuting agency complying with statutory provisions to avoid delay in completing investigations and filing challans.\n* The court noted that the respondent-State had failed to comply with statutory provisions, resulting in the accused getting benefit of default bail.\n\n**4. Citations:**\n\n* **Abdul Azeez P.V. v. National Investigation Agency**, 2015 (1) RCR (Criminal) 239\n* **Mehal Singh v. State of Haryana**, 1978 PLR 480",
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
print(embeddings.shape)
# [3, 768]

# Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities.shape)
# [3, 3]

Evaluation

Metrics

Information Retrieval

Datasets: dim_768 and dim_512
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator

Metric	dim_768	dim_512
cosine_accuracy@1	0.0824	0.0778
cosine_accuracy@3	0.2484	0.235
cosine_accuracy@5	0.3394	0.3275
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4761	0.4656
cosine_precision@1	0.0824	0.0778
cosine_precision@3	0.0828	0.0783
cosine_precision@5	0.0679	0.0655
cosine_precision@10	0.0476	0.0466
cosine_recall@1	0.0824	0.0778
cosine_recall@3	0.2484	0.235
cosine_recall@5	0.3394	0.3275
cosine_recall@10	0.4761	0.4656
cosine_ndcg@10	0.2582	0.2502
cosine_mrr@10	0.1909	0.1837
cosine_map@100	0.2018	0.1947

Training Details

Training Dataset

json

Dataset: json
Size: 132,576 training samples
Columns: anchor and positive
Approximate statistics based on the first 1000 samples:
anchor positive
type string string
details
min: 2 tokens
mean: 26.94 tokens
max: 199 tokens

min: 298 tokens
mean: 543.71 tokens
max: 1266 tokens

	anchor	positive
type	string	string
details	min: 2 tokens mean: 26.94 tokens max: 199 tokens	min: 298 tokens mean: 543.71 tokens max: 1266 tokens

Samples:

anchor	positive
`What are the legal implications of a court setting aside an order related to the initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process due to a pre-existing dispute?`	1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings: * Existence of Dispute: The main legal issue is whether there was an existence of dispute prior to the issuance of the Demand Notice dated 11.04.2019. * Section 8 of IBC: The court considered the application of Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which deals with the requirement of a dispute to be raised by the corporate debtor in response to a demand notice. * Admissibility of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP): The court's ruling affected the admissibility of the CIRP against the corporate debtor. 2. Significant Facts of the Case: * The corporate debtor, Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd., had a pre-existing dispute with the operational creditor, Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd. * The operational creditor issued a demand notice dated 11.04.2019, which was received by the corporate debtor on 16.04.2019. * The corporate debtor raised disputes through e-mails dated 04.10.2018, 01.11.2018, and 04.12.2018, among o...
`How does the court assess whether a dispute is genuine or merely spurious, hypothetical, or illusory?`	1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings: * Existence of Dispute: The court considered whether a dispute existed between the parties before the issuance of the Demand Notice under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. * Pre-existing Dispute: The court relied on the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Mobilox Innovations Private Limited v. KIRUSA Software Pvt. Ltd." that a dispute must be pre-existing before the receipt of the Demand Notice. * Section 8 of the Code: The court analyzed the provisions of Section 8 of the Code, which deals with the procedure for an operational creditor to initiate insolvency proceedings against a corporate debtor. * Nature of Dispute: The court held that the dispute was genuine and not spurious, hypothetical, or illusory, and that the corporate debtor had raised a plausible contention that required further investigation. 2. Significant Facts of the Case: * The operational creditor, Nirmal K. Dhiran, supp...
`What are the legal implications of dowry demands and cruelty under Indian law, particularly in the context of Section 498-A IPC?`	1. Key Legal Issues and Holdings: * Dowry and Cruelty: The case revolves around allegations of dowry demands and cruelty by the husband (petitioner) towards his wife. * Section 498-A IPC: The main legal issue is the application of Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which deals with cruelty by the husband or his relatives towards a married woman. * Rent Control and Eviction: The case also involves a dispute over rent control and eviction under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. 2. Significant Facts of the Case: * The petitioner, Mangat Ram, was convicted under Section 498-A IPC. * He was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a fine. * He appealed the conviction and sentence, which was dismissed. * He then filed a revision petition, seeking a reduction in sentence. * The petitioner had already served over two months in prison. * The complainant (wife) had obtained an ex-parte divorce decree. **3. Cou...

Loss: MatryoshkaLoss with these parameters:

{
    "loss": "MultipleNegativesRankingLoss",
    "matryoshka_dims": [
        768,
        512
    ],
    "matryoshka_weights": [
        1,
        1
    ],
    "n_dims_per_step": -1
}

Training Hyperparameters

Non-Default Hyperparameters

eval_strategy: epoch
gradient_accumulation_steps: 8
learning_rate: 2e-05
num_train_epochs: 4
lr_scheduler_type: cosine
warmup_ratio: 0.1
bf16: True
tf32: True
load_best_model_at_end: True
optim: adamw_torch_fused
batch_sampler: no_duplicates

All Hyperparameters

Click to expand

overwrite_output_dir: False
do_predict: False
eval_strategy: epoch
prediction_loss_only: True
per_device_train_batch_size: 8
per_device_eval_batch_size: 8
per_gpu_train_batch_size: None
per_gpu_eval_batch_size: None
gradient_accumulation_steps: 8
eval_accumulation_steps: None
torch_empty_cache_steps: None
learning_rate: 2e-05
weight_decay: 0.0
adam_beta1: 0.9
adam_beta2: 0.999
adam_epsilon: 1e-08
max_grad_norm: 1.0
num_train_epochs: 4
max_steps: -1
lr_scheduler_type: cosine
lr_scheduler_kwargs: {}
warmup_ratio: 0.1
warmup_steps: 0
log_level: passive
log_level_replica: warning
log_on_each_node: True
logging_nan_inf_filter: True
save_safetensors: True
save_on_each_node: False
save_only_model: False
restore_callback_states_from_checkpoint: False
no_cuda: False
use_cpu: False
use_mps_device: False
seed: 42
data_seed: None
jit_mode_eval: False
use_ipex: False
bf16: True
fp16: False
fp16_opt_level: O1
half_precision_backend: auto
bf16_full_eval: False
fp16_full_eval: False
tf32: True
local_rank: 0
ddp_backend: None
tpu_num_cores: None
tpu_metrics_debug: False
debug: []
dataloader_drop_last: False
dataloader_num_workers: 0
dataloader_prefetch_factor: None
past_index: -1
disable_tqdm: False
remove_unused_columns: True
label_names: None
load_best_model_at_end: True
ignore_data_skip: False
fsdp: []
fsdp_min_num_params: 0
fsdp_config: {'min_num_params': 0, 'xla': False, 'xla_fsdp_v2': False, 'xla_fsdp_grad_ckpt': False}
fsdp_transformer_layer_cls_to_wrap: None
accelerator_config: {'split_batches': False, 'dispatch_batches': None, 'even_batches': True, 'use_seedable_sampler': True, 'non_blocking': False, 'gradient_accumulation_kwargs': None}
deepspeed: None
label_smoothing_factor: 0.0
optim: adamw_torch_fused
optim_args: None
adafactor: False
group_by_length: False
length_column_name: length
ddp_find_unused_parameters: None
ddp_bucket_cap_mb: None
ddp_broadcast_buffers: False
dataloader_pin_memory: True
dataloader_persistent_workers: False
skip_memory_metrics: True
use_legacy_prediction_loop: False
push_to_hub: False
resume_from_checkpoint: None
hub_model_id: None
hub_strategy: every_save
hub_private_repo: False
hub_always_push: False
gradient_checkpointing: False
gradient_checkpointing_kwargs: None
include_inputs_for_metrics: False
include_for_metrics: []
eval_do_concat_batches: True
fp16_backend: auto
push_to_hub_model_id: None
push_to_hub_organization: None
mp_parameters:
auto_find_batch_size: False
full_determinism: False
torchdynamo: None
ray_scope: last
ddp_timeout: 1800
torch_compile: False
torch_compile_backend: None
torch_compile_mode: None
dispatch_batches: None
split_batches: None
include_tokens_per_second: False
include_num_input_tokens_seen: False
neftune_noise_alpha: None
optim_target_modules: None
batch_eval_metrics: False
eval_on_start: False
use_liger_kernel: False
eval_use_gather_object: False
average_tokens_across_devices: False
prompts: None
batch_sampler: no_duplicates
multi_dataset_batch_sampler: proportional

Training Logs

Click to expand

Epoch	Step	Training Loss	dim_768_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_512_cosine_ndcg@10
0.0048	10	0.4645	-	-
0.0097	20	0.4746	-	-
0.0145	30	0.4692	-	-
0.0193	40	0.4603	-	-
0.0241	50	0.3954	-	-
0.0290	60	0.4071	-	-
0.0338	70	0.4232	-	-
0.0386	80	0.374	-	-
0.0434	90	0.3748	-	-
0.0483	100	0.3046	-	-
0.0531	110	0.3648	-	-
0.0579	120	0.2515	-	-
0.0628	130	0.3437	-	-
0.0676	140	0.298	-	-
0.0724	150	0.2658	-	-
0.0772	160	0.2989	-	-
0.0821	170	0.2322	-	-
0.0869	180	0.2816	-	-
0.0917	190	0.2436	-	-
0.0965	200	0.2335	-	-
0.1014	210	0.2156	-	-
0.1062	220	0.2305	-	-
0.1110	230	0.228	-	-
0.1159	240	0.2192	-	-
0.1207	250	0.2337	-	-
0.1255	260	0.2594	-	-
0.1303	270	0.1794	-	-
0.1352	280	0.1701	-	-
0.1400	290	0.1981	-	-
0.1448	300	0.2264	-	-
0.1497	310	0.2418	-	-
0.1545	320	0.292	-	-
0.1593	330	0.2112	-	-
0.1641	340	0.1933	-	-
0.1690	350	0.1779	-	-
0.1738	360	0.2294	-	-
0.1786	370	0.2104	-	-
0.1834	380	0.2286	-	-
0.1883	390	0.2752	-	-
0.1931	400	0.1852	-	-
0.1979	410	0.2052	-	-
0.2028	420	0.1893	-	-
0.2076	430	0.2466	-	-
0.2124	440	0.2177	-	-
0.2172	450	0.2506	-	-
0.2221	460	0.1974	-	-
0.2269	470	0.197	-	-
0.2317	480	0.1777	-	-
0.2365	490	0.1848	-	-
0.2414	500	0.1661	-	-
0.2462	510	0.2093	-	-
0.2510	520	0.1178	-	-
0.2559	530	0.2085	-	-
0.2607	540	0.1609	-	-
0.2655	550	0.1736	-	-
0.2703	560	0.1503	-	-
0.2752	570	0.1808	-	-
0.2800	580	0.1614	-	-
0.2848	590	0.2057	-	-
0.2896	600	0.1916	-	-
0.2945	610	0.1569	-	-
0.2993	620	0.184	-	-
0.3041	630	0.2615	-	-
0.3090	640	0.2152	-	-
0.3138	650	0.1426	-	-
0.3186	660	0.145	-	-
0.3234	670	0.1484	-	-
0.3283	680	0.1567	-	-
0.3331	690	0.1365	-	-
0.3379	700	0.1594	-	-
0.3427	710	0.1486	-	-
0.3476	720	0.1663	-	-
0.3524	730	0.2052	-	-
0.3572	740	0.1777	-	-
0.3621	750	0.1728	-	-
0.3669	760	0.1669	-	-
0.3717	770	0.1356	-	-
0.3765	780	0.1706	-	-
0.3814	790	0.1916	-	-
0.3862	800	0.1365	-	-
0.3910	810	0.1392	-	-
0.3958	820	0.1708	-	-
0.4007	830	0.1971	-	-
0.4055	840	0.1363	-	-
0.4103	850	0.1411	-	-
0.4152	860	0.1484	-	-
0.4200	870	0.1767	-	-
0.4248	880	0.1871	-	-
0.4296	890	0.1393	-	-
0.4345	900	0.2113	-	-
0.4393	910	0.1614	-	-
0.4441	920	0.1309	-	-
0.4490	930	0.1329	-	-
0.4538	940	0.2125	-	-
0.4586	950	0.1929	-	-
0.4634	960	0.1777	-	-
0.4683	970	0.1813	-	-
0.4731	980	0.1341	-	-
0.4779	990	0.1025	-	-
0.4827	1000	0.2471	-	-
0.4876	1010	0.1696	-	-
0.4924	1020	0.1144	-	-
0.4972	1030	0.1537	-	-
0.5021	1040	0.1389	-	-
0.5069	1050	0.2184	-	-
0.5117	1060	0.1473	-	-
0.5165	1070	0.1494	-	-
0.5214	1080	0.1568	-	-
0.5262	1090	0.1656	-	-
0.5310	1100	0.1555	-	-
0.5358	1110	0.1108	-	-
0.5407	1120	0.1163	-	-
0.5455	1130	0.1549	-	-
0.5503	1140	0.1638	-	-
0.5552	1150	0.1575	-	-
0.5600	1160	0.1294	-	-
0.5648	1170	0.1402	-	-
0.5696	1180	0.1539	-	-
0.5745	1190	0.1249	-	-
0.5793	1200	0.1042	-	-
0.5841	1210	0.1681	-	-
0.5889	1220	0.1744	-	-
0.5938	1230	0.1144	-	-
0.5986	1240	0.1183	-	-
0.6034	1250	0.1397	-	-
0.6083	1260	0.1938	-	-
0.6131	1270	0.1194	-	-
0.6179	1280	0.1374	-	-
0.6227	1290	0.1203	-	-
0.6276	1300	0.0766	-	-
0.6324	1310	0.1337	-	-
0.6372	1320	0.1695	-	-
0.6420	1330	0.1179	-	-
0.6469	1340	0.1316	-	-
0.6517	1350	0.1294	-	-
0.6565	1360	0.1125	-	-
0.6614	1370	0.1629	-	-
0.6662	1380	0.1094	-	-
0.6710	1390	0.1479	-	-
0.6758	1400	0.1479	-	-
0.6807	1410	0.1608	-	-
0.6855	1420	0.1422	-	-
0.6903	1430	0.1735	-	-
0.6951	1440	0.1403	-	-
0.7000	1450	0.1306	-	-
0.7048	1460	0.1497	-	-
0.7096	1470	0.1154	-	-
0.7145	1480	0.1308	-	-
0.7193	1490	0.1514	-	-
0.7241	1500	0.139	-	-
0.7289	1510	0.1139	-	-
0.7338	1520	0.1313	-	-
0.7386	1530	0.1844	-	-
0.7434	1540	0.1195	-	-
0.7483	1550	0.1102	-	-
0.7531	1560	0.1482	-	-
0.7579	1570	0.1232	-	-
0.7627	1580	0.1408	-	-
0.7676	1590	0.1575	-	-
0.7724	1600	0.1415	-	-
0.7772	1610	0.1344	-	-
0.7820	1620	0.1009	-	-
0.7869	1630	0.1192	-	-
0.7917	1640	0.1528	-	-
0.7965	1650	0.1006	-	-
0.8014	1660	0.0748	-	-
0.8062	1670	0.1278	-	-
0.8110	1680	0.1493	-	-
0.8158	1690	0.1751	-	-
0.8207	1700	0.1357	-	-
0.8255	1710	0.1187	-	-
0.8303	1720	0.1024	-	-
0.8351	1730	0.1238	-	-
0.8400	1740	0.1182	-	-
0.8448	1750	0.0882	-	-
0.8496	1760	0.1575	-	-
0.8545	1770	0.1378	-	-
0.8593	1780	0.1437	-	-
0.8641	1790	0.1121	-	-
0.8689	1800	0.1132	-	-
0.8738	1810	0.136	-	-
0.8786	1820	0.1421	-	-
0.8834	1830	0.1226	-	-
0.8882	1840	0.1345	-	-
0.8931	1850	0.132	-	-
0.8979	1860	0.1698	-	-
0.9027	1870	0.1307	-	-
0.9076	1880	0.0975	-	-
0.9124	1890	0.1166	-	-
0.9172	1900	0.1228	-	-
0.9220	1910	0.1339	-	-
0.9269	1920	0.1015	-	-
0.9317	1930	0.1037	-	-
0.9365	1940	0.1246	-	-
0.9413	1950	0.1302	-	-
0.9462	1960	0.144	-	-
0.9510	1970	0.128	-	-
0.9558	1980	0.1592	-	-
0.9607	1990	0.1218	-	-
0.9655	2000	0.136	-	-
0.9703	2010	0.1093	-	-
0.9751	2020	0.1364	-	-
0.9800	2030	0.1534	-	-
0.9848	2040	0.1066	-	-
0.9896	2050	0.0906	-	-
0.9944	2060	0.1656	-	-
0.9993	2070	0.1304	-	-
0.9998	2071	-	0.2679	0.2559
1.0041	2080	0.0858	-	-
1.0089	2090	0.1428	-	-
1.0138	2100	0.1223	-	-
1.0186	2110	0.1171	-	-
1.0234	2120	0.1148	-	-
1.0282	2130	0.1135	-	-
1.0331	2140	0.1257	-	-
1.0379	2150	0.1401	-	-
1.0427	2160	0.116	-	-
1.0476	2170	0.0878	-	-
1.0524	2180	0.1154	-	-
1.0572	2190	0.0801	-	-
1.0620	2200	0.118	-	-
1.0669	2210	0.127	-	-
1.0717	2220	0.125	-	-
1.0765	2230	0.1178	-	-
1.0813	2240	0.0835	-	-
1.0862	2250	0.0968	-	-
1.0910	2260	0.1122	-	-
1.0958	2270	0.1019	-	-
1.1007	2280	0.1086	-	-
1.1055	2290	0.0991	-	-
1.1103	2300	0.1141	-	-
1.1151	2310	0.1424	-	-
1.1200	2320	0.104	-	-
1.1248	2330	0.1239	-	-
1.1296	2340	0.0829	-	-
1.1344	2350	0.0706	-	-
1.1393	2360	0.0813	-	-
1.1441	2370	0.0796	-	-
1.1489	2380	0.1472	-	-
1.1538	2390	0.1315	-	-
1.1586	2400	0.1264	-	-
1.1634	2410	0.0706	-	-
1.1682	2420	0.0857	-	-
1.1731	2430	0.1078	-	-
1.1779	2440	0.0851	-	-
1.1827	2450	0.1095	-	-
1.1875	2460	0.1406	-	-
1.1924	2470	0.0932	-	-
1.1972	2480	0.1107	-	-
1.2020	2490	0.0941	-	-
1.2069	2500	0.0846	-	-
1.2117	2510	0.0785	-	-
1.2165	2520	0.0877	-	-
1.2213	2530	0.0871	-	-
1.2262	2540	0.0905	-	-
1.2310	2550	0.0769	-	-
1.2358	2560	0.0788	-	-
1.2406	2570	0.066	-	-
1.2455	2580	0.1077	-	-
1.2503	2590	0.0717	-	-
1.2551	2600	0.0902	-	-
1.2600	2610	0.0779	-	-
1.2648	2620	0.0735	-	-
1.2696	2630	0.0475	-	-
1.2744	2640	0.0549	-	-
1.2793	2650	0.0699	-	-
1.2841	2660	0.0804	-	-
1.2889	2670	0.095	-	-
1.2937	2680	0.0787	-	-
1.2986	2690	0.0708	-	-
1.3034	2700	0.1206	-	-
1.3082	2710	0.0582	-	-
1.3131	2720	0.0859	-	-
1.3179	2730	0.0553	-	-
1.3227	2740	0.0433	-	-
1.3275	2750	0.0725	-	-
1.3324	2760	0.0798	-	-
1.3372	2770	0.0683	-	-
1.3420	2780	0.0489	-	-
1.3469	2790	0.0685	-	-
1.3517	2800	0.0951	-	-
1.3565	2810	0.073	-	-
1.3613	2820	0.0687	-	-
1.3662	2830	0.0897	-	-
1.3710	2840	0.0509	-	-
1.3758	2850	0.0554	-	-
1.3806	2860	0.0736	-	-
1.3855	2870	0.0547	-	-
1.3903	2880	0.046	-	-
1.3951	2890	0.0553	-	-
1.4000	2900	0.0888	-	-
1.4048	2910	0.0487	-	-
1.4096	2920	0.0358	-	-
1.4144	2930	0.0434	-	-
1.4193	2940	0.0402	-	-
1.4241	2950	0.0581	-	-
1.4289	2960	0.0761	-	-
1.4337	2970	0.0766	-	-
1.4386	2980	0.0662	-	-
1.4434	2990	0.0434	-	-
1.4482	3000	0.0437	-	-
1.4531	3010	0.0777	-	-
1.4579	3020	0.0766	-	-
1.4627	3030	0.0455	-	-
1.4675	3040	0.0894	-	-
1.4724	3050	0.0532	-	-
1.4772	3060	0.039	-	-
1.4820	3070	0.1039	-	-
1.4868	3080	0.0757	-	-
1.4917	3090	0.0516	-	-
1.4965	3100	0.0661	-	-
1.5013	3110	0.0482	-	-
1.5062	3120	0.0707	-	-
1.5110	3130	0.0529	-	-
1.5158	3140	0.0539	-	-
1.5206	3150	0.0593	-	-
1.5255	3160	0.0825	-	-
1.5303	3170	0.0608	-	-
1.5351	3180	0.0428	-	-
1.5399	3190	0.0426	-	-
1.5448	3200	0.0515	-	-
1.5496	3210	0.0605	-	-
1.5544	3220	0.092	-	-
1.5593	3230	0.0382	-	-
1.5641	3240	0.0543	-	-
1.5689	3250	0.0624	-	-
1.5737	3260	0.0483	-	-
1.5786	3270	0.0454	-	-
1.5834	3280	0.0584	-	-
1.5882	3290	0.0745	-	-
1.5930	3300	0.04	-	-
1.5979	3310	0.0434	-	-
1.6027	3320	0.0483	-	-
1.6075	3330	0.0928	-	-
1.6124	3340	0.0532	-	-
1.6172	3350	0.0498	-	-
1.6220	3360	0.0469	-	-
1.6268	3370	0.0274	-	-
1.6317	3380	0.0379	-	-
1.6365	3390	0.0478	-	-
1.6413	3400	0.0506	-	-
1.6462	3410	0.057	-	-
1.6510	3420	0.0471	-	-
1.6558	3430	0.0541	-	-
1.6606	3440	0.0726	-	-
1.6655	3450	0.0389	-	-
1.6703	3460	0.0679	-	-
1.6751	3470	0.0584	-	-
1.6799	3480	0.0653	-	-
1.6848	3490	0.06	-	-
1.6896	3500	0.0592	-	-
1.6944	3510	0.059	-	-
1.6993	3520	0.0517	-	-
1.7041	3530	0.0495	-	-
1.7089	3540	0.0455	-	-
1.7137	3550	0.0377	-	-
1.7186	3560	0.0539	-	-
1.7234	3570	0.0401	-	-
1.7282	3580	0.0389	-	-
1.7330	3590	0.0482	-	-
1.7379	3600	0.0671	-	-
1.7427	3610	0.057	-	-
1.7475	3620	0.0389	-	-
1.7524	3630	0.0515	-	-
1.7572	3640	0.0356	-	-
1.7620	3650	0.0537	-	-
1.7668	3660	0.0617	-	-
1.7717	3670	0.0465	-	-
1.7765	3680	0.0538	-	-
1.7813	3690	0.0445	-	-
1.7861	3700	0.0417	-	-
1.7910	3710	0.0543	-	-
1.7958	3720	0.0387	-	-
1.8006	3730	0.0319	-	-
1.8055	3740	0.0518	-	-
1.8103	3750	0.0572	-	-
1.8151	3760	0.0815	-	-
1.8199	3770	0.0609	-	-
1.8248	3780	0.0428	-	-
1.8296	3790	0.0271	-	-
1.8344	3800	0.0296	-	-
1.8392	3810	0.047	-	-
1.8441	3820	0.031	-	-
1.8489	3830	0.0596	-	-
1.8537	3840	0.0615	-	-
1.8586	3850	0.0467	-	-
1.8634	3860	0.0516	-	-
1.8682	3870	0.0555	-	-
1.8730	3880	0.0446	-	-
1.8779	3890	0.0872	-	-
1.8827	3900	0.0408	-	-
1.8875	3910	0.0607	-	-
1.8923	3920	0.0415	-	-
1.8972	3930	0.0586	-	-
1.9020	3940	0.0526	-	-
1.9068	3950	0.0447	-	-
1.9117	3960	0.0565	-	-
1.9165	3970	0.0663	-	-
1.9213	3980	0.0476	-	-
1.9261	3990	0.0393	-	-
1.9310	4000	0.0407	-	-
1.9358	4010	0.0403	-	-
1.9406	4020	0.0413	-	-
1.9455	4030	0.0484	-	-
1.9503	4040	0.0581	-	-
1.9551	4050	0.0633	-	-
1.9599	4060	0.0444	-	-
1.9648	4070	0.0529	-	-
1.9696	4080	0.0423	-	-
1.9744	4090	0.0527	-	-
1.9792	4100	0.0719	-	-
1.9841	4110	0.0479	-	-
1.9889	4120	0.0478	-	-
1.9937	4130	0.0708	-	-
1.9986	4140	0.058	-	-
2.0	4143	-	0.2672	0.2575
2.0034	4150	0.0274	-	-
2.0082	4160	0.0384	-	-
2.0130	4170	0.0639	-	-
2.0179	4180	0.0462	-	-
2.0227	4190	0.0438	-	-
2.0275	4200	0.0395	-	-
2.0323	4210	0.0591	-	-
2.0372	4220	0.0519	-	-
2.0420	4230	0.0543	-	-
2.0468	4240	0.0292	-	-
2.0517	4250	0.0449	-	-
2.0565	4260	0.0552	-	-
2.0613	4270	0.0398	-	-
2.0661	4280	0.0647	-	-
2.0710	4290	0.0401	-	-
2.0758	4300	0.0419	-	-
2.0806	4310	0.0369	-	-
2.0854	4320	0.0271	-	-
2.0903	4330	0.074	-	-
2.0951	4340	0.0454	-	-
2.0999	4350	0.0439	-	-
2.1048	4360	0.0509	-	-
2.1096	4370	0.0677	-	-
2.1144	4380	0.0514	-	-
2.1192	4390	0.0437	-	-
2.1241	4400	0.069	-	-
2.1289	4410	0.0288	-	-
2.1337	4420	0.0323	-	-
2.1385	4430	0.0233	-	-
2.1434	4440	0.0322	-	-
2.1482	4450	0.0627	-	-
2.1530	4460	0.0557	-	-
2.1579	4470	0.0649	-	-
2.1627	4480	0.0305	-	-
2.1675	4490	0.0267	-	-
2.1723	4500	0.0325	-	-
2.1772	4510	0.034	-	-
2.1820	4520	0.0461	-	-
2.1868	4530	0.0679	-	-
2.1916	4540	0.033	-	-
2.1965	4550	0.0483	-	-
2.2013	4560	0.0425	-	-
2.2061	4570	0.0336	-	-
2.2110	4580	0.034	-	-
2.2158	4590	0.0382	-	-
2.2206	4600	0.0372	-	-
2.2254	4610	0.0396	-	-
2.2303	4620	0.0299	-	-
2.2351	4630	0.0258	-	-
2.2399	4640	0.0322	-	-
2.2448	4650	0.0392	-	-
2.2496	4660	0.0396	-	-
2.2544	4670	0.0406	-	-
2.2592	4680	0.0285	-	-
2.2641	4690	0.0337	-	-
2.2689	4700	0.0238	-	-
2.2737	4710	0.02	-	-
2.2785	4720	0.0347	-	-
2.2834	4730	0.0238	-	-
2.2882	4740	0.045	-	-
2.2930	4750	0.0297	-	-
2.2979	4760	0.0319	-	-
2.3027	4770	0.0502	-	-
2.3075	4780	0.0362	-	-
2.3123	4790	0.0329	-	-
2.3172	4800	0.0219	-	-
2.3220	4810	0.0176	-	-
2.3268	4820	0.0282	-	-
2.3316	4830	0.0374	-	-
2.3365	4840	0.0429	-	-
2.3413	4850	0.0164	-	-
2.3461	4860	0.0404	-	-
2.3510	4870	0.0287	-	-
2.3558	4880	0.0239	-	-
2.3606	4890	0.0402	-	-
2.3654	4900	0.0341	-	-
2.3703	4910	0.0204	-	-
2.3751	4920	0.0328	-	-
2.3799	4930	0.0388	-	-
2.3847	4940	0.0222	-	-
2.3896	4950	0.0221	-	-
2.3944	4960	0.0318	-	-
2.3992	4970	0.0401	-	-
2.4041	4980	0.0171	-	-
2.4089	4990	0.0195	-	-
2.4137	5000	0.019	-	-
2.4185	5010	0.0163	-	-
2.4234	5020	0.0278	-	-
2.4282	5030	0.0399	-	-
2.4330	5040	0.0412	-	-
2.4378	5050	0.0254	-	-
2.4427	5060	0.0175	-	-
2.4475	5070	0.0251	-	-
2.4523	5080	0.0256	-	-
2.4572	5090	0.0294	-	-
2.4620	5100	0.0278	-	-
2.4668	5110	0.0435	-	-
2.4716	5120	0.0189	-	-
2.4765	5130	0.0195	-	-
2.4813	5140	0.045	-	-
2.4861	5150	0.0614	-	-
2.4909	5160	0.0234	-	-
2.4958	5170	0.0267	-	-
2.5006	5180	0.0294	-	-
2.5054	5190	0.0232	-	-
2.5103	5200	0.026	-	-
2.5151	5210	0.0292	-	-
2.5199	5220	0.0335	-	-
2.5247	5230	0.0311	-	-
2.5296	5240	0.0248	-	-
2.5344	5250	0.0223	-	-
2.5392	5260	0.0188	-	-
2.5441	5270	0.0206	-	-
2.5489	5280	0.0264	-	-
2.5537	5290	0.0479	-	-
2.5585	5300	0.0181	-	-
2.5634	5310	0.0212	-	-
2.5682	5320	0.0207	-	-
2.5730	5330	0.0233	-	-
2.5778	5340	0.0227	-	-
2.5827	5350	0.0239	-	-
2.5875	5360	0.0267	-	-
2.5923	5370	0.0215	-	-
2.5972	5380	0.0164	-	-
2.6020	5390	0.021	-	-
2.6068	5400	0.0392	-	-
2.6116	5410	0.0277	-	-
2.6165	5420	0.0219	-	-
2.6213	5430	0.0221	-	-
2.6261	5440	0.018	-	-
2.6309	5450	0.0159	-	-
2.6358	5460	0.0213	-	-
2.6406	5470	0.0239	-	-
2.6454	5480	0.0289	-	-
2.6503	5490	0.0229	-	-
2.6551	5500	0.0307	-	-
2.6599	5510	0.0416	-	-
2.6647	5520	0.0191	-	-
2.6696	5530	0.0335	-	-
2.6744	5540	0.0402	-	-
2.6792	5550	0.0294	-	-
2.6840	5560	0.0222	-	-
2.6889	5570	0.0296	-	-
2.6937	5580	0.0347	-	-
2.6985	5590	0.0217	-	-
2.7034	5600	0.0163	-	-
2.7082	5610	0.0209	-	-
2.7130	5620	0.0195	-	-
2.7178	5630	0.0273	-	-
2.7227	5640	0.0169	-	-
2.7275	5650	0.0191	-	-
2.7323	5660	0.0166	-	-
2.7371	5670	0.0265	-	-
2.7420	5680	0.0313	-	-
2.7468	5690	0.0215	-	-
2.7516	5700	0.0228	-	-
2.7565	5710	0.0208	-	-
2.7613	5720	0.0206	-	-
2.7661	5730	0.0208	-	-
2.7709	5740	0.0317	-	-
2.7758	5750	0.0283	-	-
2.7806	5760	0.0206	-	-
2.7854	5770	0.0145	-	-
2.7902	5780	0.0238	-	-
2.7951	5790	0.0228	-	-
2.7999	5800	0.0133	-	-
2.8047	5810	0.0194	-	-
2.8096	5820	0.0398	-	-
2.8144	5830	0.025	-	-
2.8192	5840	0.0309	-	-
2.8240	5850	0.0355	-	-
2.8289	5860	0.0123	-	-
2.8337	5870	0.0182	-	-
2.8385	5880	0.023	-	-
2.8434	5890	0.0191	-	-
2.8482	5900	0.023	-	-
2.8530	5910	0.0356	-	-
2.8578	5920	0.0239	-	-
2.8627	5930	0.0203	-	-
2.8675	5940	0.0154	-	-
2.8723	5950	0.025	-	-
2.8771	5960	0.0491	-	-
2.8820	5970	0.0205	-	-
2.8868	5980	0.03	-	-
2.8916	5990	0.0249	-	-
2.8965	6000	0.0355	-	-
2.9013	6010	0.0277	-	-
2.9061	6020	0.0231	-	-
2.9109	6030	0.0202	-	-
2.9158	6040	0.0294	-	-
2.9206	6050	0.0181	-	-
2.9254	6060	0.0179	-	-
2.9302	6070	0.0275	-	-
2.9351	6080	0.0211	-	-
2.9399	6090	0.0191	-	-
2.9447	6100	0.0233	-	-
2.9496	6110	0.0302	-	-
2.9544	6120	0.0344	-	-
2.9592	6130	0.0391	-	-
2.9640	6140	0.0242	-	-
2.9689	6150	0.0212	-	-
2.9737	6160	0.0404	-	-
2.9785	6170	0.0428	-	-
2.9833	6180	0.0206	-	-
2.9882	6190	0.0265	-	-
2.9930	6200	0.0378	-	-
2.9978	6210	0.0255	-	-
2.9998	6214	-	0.2628	0.2557
3.0027	6220	0.024	-	-
3.0075	6230	0.0198	-	-
3.0123	6240	0.0234	-	-
3.0171	6250	0.0424	-	-
3.0220	6260	0.0297	-	-
3.0268	6270	0.0209	-	-
3.0316	6280	0.0344	-	-
3.0364	6290	0.0273	-	-
3.0413	6300	0.0247	-	-
3.0461	6310	0.0206	-	-
3.0509	6320	0.0231	-	-
3.0558	6330	0.0265	-	-
3.0606	6340	0.0198	-	-
3.0654	6350	0.0389	-	-
3.0702	6360	0.0171	-	-
3.0751	6370	0.0235	-	-
3.0799	6380	0.0228	-	-
3.0847	6390	0.0184	-	-
3.0895	6400	0.0459	-	-
3.0944	6410	0.0222	-	-
3.0992	6420	0.0186	-	-
3.1040	6430	0.0246	-	-
3.1089	6440	0.0446	-	-
3.1137	6450	0.0333	-	-
3.1185	6460	0.0205	-	-
3.1233	6470	0.0228	-	-
3.1282	6480	0.0287	-	-
3.1330	6490	0.0205	-	-
3.1378	6500	0.0143	-	-
3.1427	6510	0.0159	-	-
3.1475	6520	0.0367	-	-
3.1523	6530	0.0327	-	-
3.1571	6540	0.0355	-	-
3.1620	6550	0.0202	-	-
3.1668	6560	0.0133	-	-
3.1716	6570	0.0143	-	-
3.1764	6580	0.0171	-	-
3.1813	6590	0.0208	-	-
3.1861	6600	0.0368	-	-
3.1909	6610	0.0238	-	-
3.1958	6620	0.0276	-	-
3.2006	6630	0.0269	-	-
3.2054	6640	0.0152	-	-
3.2102	6650	0.0229	-	-
3.2151	6660	0.0189	-	-
3.2199	6670	0.0206	-	-
3.2247	6680	0.0206	-	-
3.2295	6690	0.0164	-	-
3.2344	6700	0.0121	-	-
3.2392	6710	0.0224	-	-
3.2440	6720	0.0193	-	-
3.2489	6730	0.0213	-	-
3.2537	6740	0.0216	-	-
3.2585	6750	0.0155	-	-
3.2633	6760	0.0185	-	-
3.2682	6770	0.018	-	-
3.2730	6780	0.0107	-	-
3.2778	6790	0.0218	-	-
3.2826	6800	0.0161	-	-
3.2875	6810	0.0256	-	-
3.2923	6820	0.015	-	-
3.2971	6830	0.0132	-	-
3.3020	6840	0.0228	-	-
3.3068	6850	0.0274	-	-
3.3116	6860	0.0232	-	-
3.3164	6870	0.0122	-	-
3.3213	6880	0.0101	-	-
3.3261	6890	0.0138	-	-
3.3309	6900	0.0223	-	-
3.3357	6910	0.018	-	-
3.3406	6920	0.0105	-	-
3.3454	6930	0.0212	-	-
3.3502	6940	0.0189	-	-
3.3551	6950	0.0115	-	-
3.3599	6960	0.0187	-	-
3.3647	6970	0.0237	-	-
3.3695	6980	0.0172	-	-
3.3744	6990	0.0148	-	-
3.3792	7000	0.0234	-	-
3.3840	7010	0.0139	-	-
3.3888	7020	0.012	-	-
3.3937	7030	0.0181	-	-
3.3985	7040	0.0247	-	-
3.4033	7050	0.0114	-	-
3.4082	7060	0.0107	-	-
3.4130	7070	0.0133	-	-
3.4178	7080	0.0092	-	-
3.4226	7090	0.0168	-	-
3.4275	7100	0.0225	-	-
3.4323	7110	0.0127	-	-
3.4371	7120	0.0231	-	-
3.4420	7130	0.0104	-	-
3.4468	7140	0.0114	-	-
3.4516	7150	0.0084	-	-
3.4564	7160	0.0261	-	-
3.4613	7170	0.0201	-	-
3.4661	7180	0.0251	-	-
3.4709	7190	0.0135	-	-
3.4757	7200	0.0126	-	-
3.4806	7210	0.0257	-	-
3.4854	7220	0.0369	-	-
3.4902	7230	0.0137	-	-
3.4951	7240	0.016	-	-
3.4999	7250	0.0187	-	-
3.5047	7260	0.0156	-	-
3.5095	7270	0.0141	-	-
3.5144	7280	0.0258	-	-
3.5192	7290	0.0283	-	-
3.5240	7300	0.02	-	-
3.5288	7310	0.0283	-	-
3.5337	7320	0.0142	-	-
3.5385	7330	0.0107	-	-
3.5433	7340	0.0144	-	-
3.5482	7350	0.0146	-	-
3.5530	7360	0.0321	-	-
3.5578	7370	0.0101	-	-
3.5626	7380	0.0145	-	-
3.5675	7390	0.0132	-	-
3.5723	7400	0.0159	-	-
3.5771	7410	0.0167	-	-
3.5819	7420	0.0116	-	-
3.5868	7430	0.0175	-	-
3.5916	7440	0.0156	-	-
3.5964	7450	0.0096	-	-
3.6013	7460	0.0156	-	-
3.6061	7470	0.0251	-	-
3.6109	7480	0.0163	-	-
3.6157	7490	0.0118	-	-
3.6206	7500	0.0161	-	-
3.6254	7510	0.0131	-	-
3.6302	7520	0.0091	-	-
3.6350	7530	0.0136	-	-
3.6399	7540	0.0175	-	-
3.6447	7550	0.0213	-	-
3.6495	7560	0.0168	-	-
3.6544	7570	0.02	-	-
3.6592	7580	0.0204	-	-
3.6640	7590	0.0132	-	-
3.6688	7600	0.0254	-	-
3.6737	7610	0.0313	-	-
3.6785	7620	0.0107	-	-
3.6833	7630	0.0241	-	-
3.6881	7640	0.0188	-	-
3.6930	7650	0.0166	-	-
3.6978	7660	0.021	-	-
3.7026	7670	0.0126	-	-
3.7075	7680	0.0148	-	-
3.7123	7690	0.0155	-	-
3.7171	7700	0.0117	-	-
3.7219	7710	0.0124	-	-
3.7268	7720	0.0121	-	-
3.7316	7730	0.0118	-	-
3.7364	7740	0.0182	-	-
3.7413	7750	0.0168	-	-
3.7461	7760	0.0146	-	-
3.7509	7770	0.0199	-	-
3.7557	7780	0.0109	-	-
3.7606	7790	0.0192	-	-
3.7654	7800	0.014	-	-
3.7702	7810	0.0261	-	-
3.7750	7820	0.0176	-	-
3.7799	7830	0.0156	-	-
3.7847	7840	0.0112	-	-
3.7895	7850	0.0136	-	-
3.7944	7860	0.0174	-	-
3.7992	7870	0.0082	-	-
3.8040	7880	0.0111	-	-
3.8088	7890	0.0279	-	-
3.8137	7900	0.0206	-	-
3.8185	7910	0.0174	-	-
3.8233	7920	0.0263	-	-
3.8281	7930	0.0091	-	-
3.8330	7940	0.0127	-	-
3.8378	7950	0.0138	-	-
3.8426	7960	0.0168	-	-
3.8475	7970	0.0141	-	-
3.8523	7980	0.0317	-	-
3.8571	7990	0.0167	-	-
3.8619	8000	0.0151	-	-
3.8668	8010	0.0122	-	-
3.8716	8020	0.0167	-	-
3.8764	8030	0.0382	-	-
3.8812	8040	0.0128	-	-
3.8861	8050	0.0232	-	-
3.8909	8060	0.0222	-	-
3.8957	8070	0.0194	-	-
3.9006	8080	0.0191	-	-
3.9054	8090	0.0136	-	-
3.9102	8100	0.0106	-	-
3.9150	8110	0.0216	-	-
3.9199	8120	0.0178	-	-
3.9247	8130	0.0126	-	-
3.9295	8140	0.0158	-	-
3.9343	8150	0.0186	-	-
3.9392	8160	0.0167	-	-
3.9440	8170	0.0159	-	-
3.9488	8180	0.0174	-	-
3.9537	8190	0.0211	-	-
3.9585	8200	0.0245	-	-
3.9633	8210	0.0186	-	-
3.9681	8220	0.0162	-	-
3.9730	8230	0.0312	-	-
3.9778	8240	0.033	-	-
3.9826	8250	0.0147	-	-
3.9874	8260	0.0224	-	-
3.9923	8270	0.0215	-	-
3.9971	8280	0.0275	-	-
3.9990	8284	-	0.2582	0.2502

The bold row denotes the saved checkpoint.

Framework Versions

Python: 3.11.5
Sentence Transformers: 3.3.1
Transformers: 4.46.3
PyTorch: 2.4.1+cu121
Accelerate: 0.34.2
Datasets: 3.0.0
Tokenizers: 0.20.3

Citation

BibTeX

Sentence Transformers

@inproceedings{reimers-2019-sentence-bert,
    title = "Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks",
    author = "Reimers, Nils and Gurevych, Iryna",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
    month = "11",
    year = "2019",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084",
}

MatryoshkaLoss

@misc{kusupati2024matryoshka,
    title={Matryoshka Representation Learning},
    author={Aditya Kusupati and Gantavya Bhatt and Aniket Rege and Matthew Wallingford and Aditya Sinha and Vivek Ramanujan and William Howard-Snyder and Kaifeng Chen and Sham Kakade and Prateek Jain and Ali Farhadi},
    year={2024},
    eprint={2205.13147},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    primaryClass={cs.LG}
}

MultipleNegativesRankingLoss

@misc{henderson2017efficient,
    title={Efficient Natural Language Response Suggestion for Smart Reply},
    author={Matthew Henderson and Rami Al-Rfou and Brian Strope and Yun-hsuan Sung and Laszlo Lukacs and Ruiqi Guo and Sanjiv Kumar and Balint Miklos and Ray Kurzweil},
    year={2017},
    eprint={1705.00652},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    primaryClass={cs.CL}
}