Legal Vidhiya
  • Home
  • Case Laws
    • Supreme Court
      • 2010-2011
      • 2012-2013
      • 2011-2012
      • 2013-2014
      • 2015-2016
      • 2014-2015
      • 2016-2017
      • 2017-2018
      • 2018-2019
      • 2019-2020
      • 2020-2021
      • 2021-2022
      • 2022-2023
      • 2023-2024
      • 2024-2025
  • Article
  • Law As A Career!
  • Contents
    • Advocates Act, 1961
    • Administrative Law
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
    • Banking Law
    • Business Law
    • Constitutional Law
    • Company Law
    • Criminology
    • Code of Civil Procedure
    • Code of Criminal Procedure
    • Cyber Law
    • Family Law
      • Muslim Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Law of Evidence
    • Law of Tort
    • Human Rights
    • Indian Contract Act, 1872
    • International Law
    • Indian Partnership Act, 1932
    • Intellectual Property Rights
    • Interpretation of Statues
    • Jurisprudence
    • Juvenile Justice Act
    • Medical Law
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
    • Prevention of Sexual Harassment at Workplace
    • MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988
    • NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881
    • Property Law
    • Right to Information
    • Taxation Law
    • Trademark Law
    • SPACE LAW
    • SPORTS LAW
    • Unlawful activities prevention act, 1967 (UAPA)
  • Bare Act
  • OPPORTUNITY
    • Internship
    • Moot
    • Call For Paper
    • Debate
    • Quiz
    • Workshop/Seminar/Webinar
    • Get Published at Legal Vidhiya
  • About
    • HONORARY BOARD
    • Our Team
      • FOUNDER’S
      • Executive Committee
      • Core Team
  • Youtube
  • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Code of Conduct
    • Disclaimer Policy
  • Contact Us

KOTLA VENKATASWAMY VS CHINTA RAMAMURTHY (1934)

KOTLA VENKATASWAMY VS CHINTA RAMAMURTHY (1934)
Case Laws

KOTLA VENKATASWAMY VS CHINTA RAMAMURTHY (1934)

Citation AIR 1934 Mad 579 Date of Judgment 16 January, 1934  Court Madras High Court Based on  Doctrien of Constructive Notice  Application Kotla Venkataswamy  Respondent Chinta Ramamurthy Bench Justice Curgenven Referred  Section- 399 of the Companies Act FACTS OF THE CASE ISSUES  ARGUMENTS The plaintiff argues that the mortgage bond Read more

By Admin, 2 yearsNovember 15, 2023 ago

Visitor Count
3915303
Users Today : 4301
Click Here To Join Our WhatsApp Grouplogo

Hestia | Developed by ThemeIsle