Dismissed

Scv (a Unit of Kal Cables v. the Telecom Disputes

Madras HC7 Feb 2023WP/28112/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed the Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as infructuous, noting that final orders had been passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal in the earlier proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous; Connected Miscellaneous Petitions dismissed; No costs.

Scv (a Unit of Kal Cables Vs the Telecom Disputes — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.28112 of 2010

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 07.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

W.P.No.28112 of 2010 & M.P.Nos. 2 and 3 of 2010

¶7

SCV (A Unit of Kal Cables Private Ltd) rep. by its authorized signatory, Mr.Vittal Sampathkumaran

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

¶11

M/s.Shalini Zen Network, 19, Elanga Complex, Diwan Street, Court Road, Thanjavur – 613 001.

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari call for the records on the file of the first respondent in petition No.364(c) of 2010 dated 29.11.2010 and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : Ms.Sneha Mr.M.A.Vimal Mohan for Mr.B.K.Girish Neelakantan

¶15

For Respondents : No appearance - R2

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.No.28112 of 2010

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Read this order in conjunction with and in continuation of order dated 02.02.2023 that reads as follows:

¶20

Mr.Suresh Babu, learned counsel states that he is entering appearance for the petitioner and is yet to file vakalat. He seeks some time, as the bundle

¶21

has been misplaced. A copy of typed set of papers is handed over to him.

¶22

2. Final opportunity is granted to report the fate of appeal filed by Shalini Zen TV Network, Tamilnadu/R2 in the Writ Petition before R1, the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

¶23

3. There is no appearance for the respondents, despite a counsel having entered appearance for R2.

¶24

4. Thus, while retaining the caption 'for dismissal' as well as the name of

¶25

the present counsel on record for the petitioner, at the request of Mr.Suresh Babu, list on 07.02.2023.

¶26

Ms.Sneha, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that nothing survives in this matter, since final orders have been passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi as early as 08.06.2011. An endorsement is also made to this effect by Mr.Vimal Mohan, learned counsel, who is on record.

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.No.28112 of 2010

¶29

Recording the aforesaid, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.

¶30

07.02.2023

¶31

Sl Index : Yes / No Speaking Order Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶32

To 1. The Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.28112 of 2010

¶35

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

¶36

¶37

W.P.No.28112 of 2010 & M.P.Nos. 2 and 3 of 2010

¶38

07.02.2023

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Scv (a Unit of Kal Cables v. the Telecom Disputes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Scv (a Unit of Kal Cables v. the Telecom Disputes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Daily Whole Sale Vs Foreman

Mahendran @ Balakrishnan Vs The Deputy Superintendent of

G.Devarajan Vs The Chief Secretary

Smt.B.Sasi, Vs Pondicherry Industrial

Precision Controls, a Firm Vs the State Bank of India

Subramanian, Vs The Secretary to