The Tribunal recorded a settlement between the petitioner and one respondent but clarified that the non-signatory respondent is not bound by its terms, reconstituting the settlement terms as an order while disposing of the petition.
Settlement terms recorded as order; petitioner's prayer granted; respondent no. 1 not bound.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
6/7/2018
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI
DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2005
PETITION No.39(C) OF 2005 (M.A.Nos. 110, 120,138, 200 of 2005)
Ujjain Telecommunications …Petitioner Vs
M/s Star India Pvt. Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents
BEFORE:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,
CHAIRPERSON
MR. VINOD VAISH,MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER
For Petitioner : Mr.Prabhat Kumar,Advocate For Respondent No.1-Star India : Mr.Gopal Jain with Pvt. Ltd. Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Mr.Ashish Jha,Advocates For Respondent No.2-S.R.Cables : Mr.Dhirendra Negi,Advocate
ORDER
An application, being M.A.No.200 of 2005, u/s 16 of the TRAI Act,1997 read with Order 23 Rule 3 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 has been filed, which has been signed by the petitioner and respondent no.2 where it is prayed that an order be passed in terms of the said settlement. Learned counsel for the first respondent submits that in paragraph-2 of the said settlement it is mentioned that respondent no.1 has consented to the terms of the settlement which is factually incorrect but he has no objection to the settlement being brought on record as settlement reached between the petitioner and respondent no.2 only.
Noting the above objection, we accept the application referred to herein above and make the terms of the settlement as order of this Tribunal. However, we make it clear that respondent no.1 shall not be bound by terms of the settlement. Ordered accordingly.
Petition No.39(C) of 2005, along with the M.As., is disposed of.
…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson
file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202005/Petition%20No.39(C).htm
1/2
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
6/7/2018
……………. (Vinod Vaish) Member
………………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member
file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202005/Petition%20No.39(C).htm
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a settlement reached between the petitioner and one respondent can be recorded as an order of the Tribunal in the absence of the other respondent.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ujjain Telecommunications
M/s Star India Pvt. Ltd.
S.R.Cables
N. Santosh Hegde
Vinod Vaish
D. P. Sehgal
As recorded by the court registry
A petition before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal in a broadcasting or cable-distribution dispute.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
