{"id":83404,"date":"1998-04-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1998-04-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998"},"modified":"2016-02-04T16:18:07","modified_gmt":"2016-02-04T10:48:07","slug":"dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","title":{"rendered":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998<\/div>\n
Author: L Prasad<\/div>\n
Bench: L Prasad<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 Lokeshwar Prasad, J.<\/p>\n
 1.     This  order  shall  dispose of an application (IA  135\/95),  filed  on behalf  of the defendants, under Order XI Rule 12 and 14 read with  Section 151  of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as  ‘the CPC’) for the discovery and production of the documents.\n<\/p>\n
 2.   The  facts, relevant for the disposal of the above mentioned  application,  briefly stated, are that the plaintiff Sh. Dharampal Arora,  in  his capacity as sole proprietor of M\/s Dharampal Arora, Stock & Share  Brokers, has  filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs.50,00,000\/- against  the defendants  averring that defendants 2 & 3 are partners or  proprietors  of defendant  No.1 and that the defendants were dealing in buying and  selling of  shares with the plaintiff and at times through plaintiff prior to  1989 till  1992.  It is stated that the defendants were taking  and  giving  the
\ndeliveries  of the shares through the plaintiff and settling all the  monetary  transactions  with the plaintiff. It is alleged that  the  defendants were  also dealing in forward trading in specified shares with  the  plaintiff.  It  is stated that the defendants earned huge profit  in  the  share business  through plaintiff before 1992 and both the parties opened  mutual current  account because there had been reciprocal dealings in  respect  of the  above said business between the parties prior to 1989 till 1992.  Both the  parties had very good business relations during the above said  period
\nand  the accounts between the parties were finally settled and  cleared  on 23.8.91  when a cheque for Rs.1,03,188\/- was given by the plaintiff to  the defendants  and the same was duly encashed by the defendants. It is  stated that as per the books of accounts maintained by the staff of the  plaintiff a sum of Rs.33,59,809.70 is due against the defendants for the period  from 3.8.91  to 27.11.92. It is stated that the above said amount due and  payable to the plaintiff by the defendants has not been paid by the defendants inspite of the repeated requests and demands. It is further averred that as
\nthe  defendants are not paying the above said amount which is due and  payable to the plaintiff by the defendants intentionally and  deliberately,the defendants are also liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum as per usage and
\ncustom of the market being money transaction. As per the case of the plaintiff on the date of the filing of the suit an amount of Rs. 16,40,190.30 is payable by the defendants to the plaintiff on account of interest. Thus  in all,  as per the case of the plaintiff, the defendants are liable to pay  a sum  of Rs. 50,00,000\/- to the plaintiff including the amount of  principal as well as interest.\n<\/p>\n
 3.   Since  the defendants failed to pay the amount payable and due to  the plaintiff, the plaintiff got served a legal notice dated the 2nd  February, 1995  but despite service of legal notice the defendants have not cared  to pay the above said amount which as per the case of the plaintiff is due and payable to the plaintiff by the defendants and hence the suit. It has  been prayed  by the plaintiff that a decree for a sum of Rs. 50,00,000\/-  alongwith  costs and pendentelite and future interest @ 18% per annum be  passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.\n<\/p>\n
 4.   The  suit(Suit No.986\/95), filed by the plaintiff,came up for  hearing for the first time before the learned predecessor of this Court on  24.4.95 and  it was directed that suit summonses be issued to the  defendants.  The
\ndefendants,  after  the receipt of the suit summonses,  instead  of  filing written  statement  have filed the above mentioned  application(IA  135\/95) under Order XI Rule 12 & 14 read with Section 151 CPC for the discovery and
\nproduction  of documents mentioned therein. Notice of the  application  was given to the plaintiff who has filed a detailed reply strongly opposing the prayer  made  by the defendants for the production and discovery  of  documents.  In the reply, filed on behalf of the plaintiff, it is  stated  that the  application which is devoid of substance be dismissed with costs.  The defendants\/applicants  have  also filed a rejoinder to the reply  filed  on behalf of the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
 5.   In so far as the above mentioned application (IA135\/95) is concerned I have  heard  the learned counsel for the parties at length  and  have  also carefully  gone  through the documents\/material on  record.  The  privilege vested  in a party to the suit by the provisions of Order XI Rule 12  &  14 CPC,  as  per settled law, is not intended to enable him  to  cause  roving inquiry  to fish out information which may or may not be relevant  for  the disposal of the suit. However, the parties seeking discovery or  production of the document need not specify the Court that the document in question is
\nadmissible as evidence in the suit. It would be sufficient to show that the contents  of the document would through light on the subject matter of  the suit. Unless these basic requirements are met the above said provisions  of the CPC are likely to be utilised for harassing the other party instead  of helping in for proper adjudication of the dispute in the case. Again law is well settled that an order under Rule 14 can be made if two  pre-conditions as  contemplated  by Rule 14 are satisfied, namely, that  the  document  in question  must be in the possession or power of the party against whom  the
\norder is made and secondly the document must relate to the matter in  question in the suit.\n<\/p>\n
 6.   I  will  now examine the request of the defendants\/applicants  in  the light of the above settled legal position with reference to the document(s) sought  to  be  produced. The defendants\/applicants  vide  above  mentioned application have requested for the production of the following documents:-\n<\/p>\n
      i)  Trading Hall Diary, known as ‘chopri’ which is issued by  the Delhi  Stock Exchange to every Member in which all  the  transactions of purchase and sale of shares are entered into.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      ii)  Daily Transaction Sheet also known as ‘Sauda Match’which  is also  issued  by  the Delhi Stock Exchange to  every  Member  for specified  shares and non-specified shares and every  Member  who has  transacted  business is required to submit the same  to  the Delhi Stock Exchange at the end of the trading session.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      iii) Register of transactions which is to be maintained by  every Broker  as  per  the statutory requirements of  the  Delhi  Stock Exchange.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      iv)  Contract Note which a Member of the Delhi Stock Exchange  is required  to issue to a client regarding purchase\/sale of  shares within 24 hours of the contract.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      v) Details of ‘Badla Transactions’ and ‘Margin Deposits’.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      vi) Details of the bills as mentioned in Annexure’C’ annexed with the application.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      As  per the averments made in the plaint the plaintiff is a Member  of the Delhi Stock Exchange and the dealings of the parties and their business was  sale  and  purchase of shares. In the above background  it  cannot  be stated  that  the above mentioned documents, sought to be produced  by  the defendants  do  not relate to the matter in question in the  present  suit. Moreover,  the plaintiff in the reply filed to the above  said  application has nowhere stated that the above said docuemnts, sought to be produced  by the  defendants\/applicants  are not relevant or germane in so  far  as  the
\npresent proceedings are concerned. On the contrary the plaintiff  alongwith the  reply filed by him has filed a number of copies of the bills in  question, sought to be produced by the defendants\/applicants. The plaintiff, in the  reply,  has admitted the procedure for maintaining  Daily  Transaction Sheet known as Sauda Match, register of transactions and the Contract Note. Out of the documents, sought to be produced the plaintiff, in reply it  has been  has  stated that the Daily Transaction Sheet (Sauda Match)  had  been filed in Delhi Stock Exchange and the same are available in that office. In
\nrespect  of the other documents it has not been stated by the plaintiff  in the reply that they are not in his power and possession.\n<\/p>\n
 7.   The learned counsel for the plaintiff, during the course of arguments, has placed reliance on a decision of Patna High Court in case Thakur Prasad Vs.  Md.  Sohayal and others reported as AIR 1977 Patna 233.  I  have  gone through  the  above decision of the Patna High Court. The same  relates  to serving of interrogates under Order XI Rule 1 CPC and thus in no way  helps the  cause of the plaintiff\/non-applicant in so far as the above  mentioned application is concerned.\n<\/p>\n
 8.   The learned counsel for the plaintiff\/non-applicant during the  course of  arguments stated that the record prior to 23.8.91 has no  relevancy  as the controversy between the parties relate to period from 23.8.91 to November, 1992. The above said argument, advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiff\/non-applicant, decidedly is not without substance because as  per the averments made in the plaint, the plaintiff himself has stated that the accounts  were  finally settled and cleared upto 23.8.91 between  both  the parties  when a cheque for Rs.1,03,188\/- was given by the plaintiff to  the
\ndefendants and the same was duly encashed by the defendants. The amount  of Rs.33,59,809.70  stated  to  be due and payable by the  defendants  to  the plaintiff also relates to period commencing from 23.8.91 to 27.11.92 and as such  the record relating to the above said period only is relevant  in  so far as the present proceedings are concerned.\n<\/p>\n
 9.   In view of the above discussion, the application (IA 135\/95) filed  by the  defendants\/applicants is partly allowed and the plaintiff is  directed to  produce the following records\/documents for the period from 23.8.91  to 27.11.92:-\n<\/p>\n
      i) Trading Hall Diary also known as ‘chopri’.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      ii) Register of Transactions.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      iii)  Contract Notes in respect of transactions with the  defendants.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      iv) Details of ‘Badla’ transactions and ‘Margin Deposits’ ; and <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
      v)  Bills  referred to in Annexure’C’ other  than  those  already filed  by  the plaintiff alongwith the plaint and  alongwith  the reply dated the 2nd January, 1996.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 10.  In  the  facts and circumstances of the case the parties are  left  to bear their own costs.\n<\/p>\n
 11.  Nothing  stated hereinabove shall amount to expression of any  opinionion the merits of this case by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
      The application (IA 135\/95) stands disposed of in above terms.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 Author: L Prasad Bench: L Prasad ORDER Lokeshwar Prasad, J. 1. This order shall dispose of an application (IA 135\/95), filed on behalf of the defendants, under Order XI Rule 12 and 14 read with Section 151 of the Code […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-83404","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dharampal Arora vs M\\\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998\",\"datePublished\":\"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\"},\"wordCount\":1735,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\",\"name\":\"Dharampal Arora vs M\\\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dharampal Arora vs M\\\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998","datePublished":"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998"},"wordCount":1735,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998","name":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1998-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-04T10:48:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharampal-arora-vs-ms-share-tips-others-on-21-april-1998#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dharampal Arora vs M\/S Share Tips & Others on 21 April, 1998"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83404","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=83404"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83404\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=83404"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=83404"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=83404"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}