Allowed

M/S Sky Vision v. Star India Pvt. Ltd.

TDSAT30 Mar 2006BROADCASTING PETITION/8/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal held that a broadcaster cannot discriminate against a similarly situated MSO. It directed the petitioner-MSO to approach Star India Private Ltd for signals on non-discriminatory and reasonable terms, allowing the broadcaster to verify the petitioner's subscriber details.

What did the court decide?

Director the petitioner to approach the first respondent for signals on non-discriminatory and reasonable terms; permitted the first respondent to verify the petitioner's subscriber list.

M/S Sky Vision vs Star India Pvt. Ltd. — Service and Employment | TDSAT (2006)

¶1

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶2

6/7/2018

¶3

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶4

DATED 30TH MARCH, 2006

¶5

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶6

(M.A.No.37 of 2006)

¶7

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶8

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶9

BEFORE:

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶11

CHAIRPERSON

¶12

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain,Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Ltd. Mr.Ashish Jha,Mr.Gaurav Vatts,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

M.A.37 of 2006:

¶16

This is an application seeking a direction to the first respondent to enter into a subscription agreement with the petitioner for supply of Satellite TV signals to the cable TV network of the petitioner.

¶17

Learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that if the petitioner desires to get signals of the first respondent then it should approach its MSO second respondent herein and enter into a subscription agreement with the said respondent.

¶18

Therefore, we direct the petitioner to approach second respondent for receiving signals of the first respondent broadcaster in which event the second respondent will consider the request on reasonable basis and if for any reason second respondent is not willing to enter into a settlement then it shall give reasons for the same. Such settlement shall be arrived at within two weeks from today. The M.A. is disposed of.

¶19

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶20

1/20

¶21

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶22

6/7/2018

¶23

List the matter on 20^th April,2006 for hearing.

¶24

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶25

…………….. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶26

………………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶27

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI ST DATED 1 FEBRUARY, 2006

¶28

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶29

(With M.A.Nos.31 & 234 of 2005)

¶30

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶31

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶32

BEFORE:

¶33

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶34

CHAIRPERSON

¶35

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶36

For Petitioner

¶37

For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. Ltd.

¶38

: Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate : Mr.Sarvesh Singh,Mr.Ashish Jha, Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶39

O R D E R

¶40

¶41

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶42

2/20

¶43

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶44

6/7/2018

¶45

MSO. It has also taken stand that it has got a recognized MSO in that area i.e. second respondent in the petition. Therefore, the petitioner should only seek signals through such MSO. This issue whether a MSO should seek signals from a competing MSO has since been settled by an order of this Tribunal in Petition No.41(C) of 2005 disposed of on 24^th August,2005 titled Sea T.V. Network Ltd. Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. wherein this Tribunal has held that between similarly situated persons the broadcaster/distributor cannot discriminate and compel one person situated in the same platform as the other to receive signals from the competitor. We are aware of the fact that this order of the Tribunal is now before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. But since there is no stay order the declaration made by this Tribunal in that case applies to the facts of the present case also.

¶46

After the coming into force of the subscription agreement regulation it has become mandatory for the parties to enter into a subscription agreement and the broadcaster/distributor who is a party to that agreement would have to register the said agreement with the authority named by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. Therefore, we direct the petitioner to approach the first respondent with the request to give signals to it treating the petitioner as a MSO. It is open to the first respondent to make such enquiry as is reasonable to satisfy itself whether in fact the petitioner is a MSO or not. It is also open to the first respondent to cross-check the list of subscribers/cable operators which will be given by the petitioner with complete address of such subscribers/cable operators as to the veracity and correctness of the same. The subscription payable by the petitioner shall be on a non discriminatory and reasonable terms as is held by this Tribunal in order dated 17^th January,2006 in E.A.No.2 of 2005 Petition No.41(C) of 2005 (supra).

¶47

If in the process of signing the agreement there arises any dispute as to the terms, the aggrieved party may approach this Tribunal.

¶48

List this matter on 29^th March,2006 for further hearing.

¶49

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶50

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶51

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶52

3/20

¶53

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶54

6/7/2018

¶55

……………. (D.P.Sehgal)

¶56

Member

¶57

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶58

ST DATED 1 FEBRUARY, 2006

¶59

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶60

(With M.A.Nos.31 & 234 of 2005)

¶61

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶62

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶63

BEFORE:

¶64

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶65

CHAIRPERSON

¶66

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶67

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Sarvesh Singh,Mr.Ashish Jha, Ltd. Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶68

O R D E R

¶69

The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that it is a MSO who has sought signals of the first respondent on a subscriber base of 2500, but the first respondent has refused to recognize the petitioner as a MSO on the ground that from the material supplied to it there is no indication of the fact that the petitioner is a MSO. It has also taken stand that it has got a recognized MSO in that area i.e. second respondent in the petition. Therefore, the petitioner should only seek signals through such MSO. This issue whether a MSO should seek signals from a competing MSO has since been settled by an order of this Tribunal in Petition No.41(C) of 2005 disposed of on 24^th August,2005 titled Sea T.V. Network Ltd. Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. wherein this Tribunal has held that between similarly situated persons the broadcaster/distributor cannot discriminate and compel one person situated in the same platform as the other to receive signals from the competitor. We are aware of the fact that this order of the Tribunal is now before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. But since there is no stay order the declaration made by this Tribunal in that case applies to the facts of the present case also.

¶70

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶71

4/20

¶72

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶73

6/7/2018

¶74

After the coming into force of the subscription agreement regulation it has become mandatory for the parties to enter into a subscription agreement and the broadcaster/distributor who is a party to that agreement would have to register the said agreement with the authority named by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. Therefore, we direct the petitioner to approach the first respondent with the request to give signals to it treating the petitioner as a MSO. It is open to the first respondent to make such enquiry as is reasonable to satisfy itself whether in fact the petitioner is a MSO or not. It is also open to the first respondent to cross-check the list of subscribers/cable operators which will be given by the petitioner with complete address of such subscribers/cable operators as to the veracity and correctness of the same. The subscription payable by the petitioner shall be on a non discriminatory and reasonable terms as is held by this Tribunal in order dated 17^th January,2006 in E.A.No.2 of 2005 Petition No.41(C) of 2005 (supra).

¶75

If in the process of signing the agreement there arises any dispute as to the terms, the aggrieved party may approach this Tribunal.

¶76

List this matter on 29^th March,2006 for further hearing.

¶77

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶78

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶79

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶80

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶81

ST DATED 3 1 JANUARY, 2006 PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶82

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶83

5/20

¶84

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶85

6/7/2018

¶86

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶87

BEFORE:

¶88

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON

¶89

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶90

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Ashish Jha,Advocate for Ltd. Karanjawala & Co. O R D E R

¶91

Adjourned to 1^st February,2006 for final hearing on the request of the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶92

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶93

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member ……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶94

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶95

RD DATED 2 3 JANUARY, 2006

¶96

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.Nos.31, 234 of 2005)

¶97

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶98

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶99

6/20

¶100

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶101

6/7/2018

¶102

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶103

BEFORE:

¶104

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶105

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Sarvesh Singh,Advocate for Ltd. Karanjawala & Co. For Respondent No.2-Future : Mr.Nidhesh Gupta,Advocate Communications Network O R D E R

¶106

It is pointed out by learned counsel for respondent no.2 that he has not been served a copy of the affidavit dated 4^th January,2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to give a copy in the course of the day. Reply, if any, shall be filed by 28^th January,2006.

¶107

Case is fixed for final hearing on 31^st January,2006.

¶108

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶109

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶110

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶111

TH DATED 1 0 JANUARY, 2006

¶112

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶113

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents BEFORE:

¶114

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON

¶115

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶116

7/20

¶117

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶118

6/7/2018

¶119

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶120

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain with Ltd. Ms. Kanika Agnihotri,Mr.Ashish Jha and Ms.Simran Brar,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶121

O R D E R

¶122

List this matter for final hearing on 23^rd January,2006.

¶123

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶124

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶125

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶126

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶127

TH DATED 4 JANUARY, 2006

¶128

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶129

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶130

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶131

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶132

BEFORE:

¶133

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶134

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶135

8/20

¶136

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶137

6/7/2018

¶138

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain with Ltd. Ms. Kanika Agnihotri,Mr.Ashish Jha and Ms.Simran Brar,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶139

O R D E R

¶140

On the request of the learned counsel for the respondent, list this matter for final hearing on 10^th January,2006.

¶141

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶142

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶143

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶144

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶145

DATED 12TH D ECEMBER, 2005

¶146

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶147

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶148

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents BEFORE:

¶149

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶150

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶151

9/20

¶152

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶153

6/7/2018

¶154

For Petitioner

¶155

: Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate

¶156

For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain with Ltd. Ms. Kanika Agnihotri and Ms.Simran Brar,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶157

O R D E R

¶158

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of arguments submitted that his client is a Multi Service Operator. But from the pleadings as filed, we find no material to substantiate this. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to file additional affidavit to establish his above contention. The affidavit may be filed within two weeks. Counter to the same, if any, be filed within one week thereafter.

¶159

List this matter for final hearing on 4^th January,2006.

¶160

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶161

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶162

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶163

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶164

DATED 16TH N OVEMBER, 2005

¶165

M.A.No.234 of 2005 in

¶166

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶167

( With M.A.No.31 of 2005 )

¶168

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶169

10/20

¶170

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶171

6/7/2018

¶172

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner

¶173

¶174

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶175

BEFORE:

¶176

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON

¶177

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ltd. Mr.Sarvesh Singh,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co. For Respondent No.2-Future : Mr.Nidhesh Gupta,Advocate Communications Network

¶178

O R D E R

¶179

List this matter for final hearing on 12^th December, 2005. Additional pleadings, if any, be filed in the meanwhile.

¶180

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶181

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶182

TH DATED 11 N OVEMBER, 2005

¶183

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶184

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶185

11/20

¶186

6/7/2018

¶187

6/7/2018 TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶188

BEFORE:

¶189

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶190

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ltd. Mr.Ashish Jha,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶191

O R D E R

¶192

In this Petition, the Petitioner is alleging that he has been refused signals by the first Respondent on the ground that he should approach the second Respondent, who the first Respondent has appointed as its exclusive MSO, which the petitioner submits is contrary to the decision of this Tribunal.

¶193

This matter was listed today for final hearing but due to the pre-occupation of this Tribunal with anoter matter, it may not be possible for us to take up this matter for final hearing today and since the Petitioner is without signal since 8^th March, 2003, we think it appropriate to direct the first Respondent, as an interim measure, to supply signals

¶194

: 2 :

¶195

to the Petitioner on such reasonable terms and conditions and without prejudice to claim of both the parties, within 48 hours from today subject to the Petitioner signing the subscription agreement with the first Respondent.

¶196

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶197

12/20

¶198

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶199

6/7/2018

¶200

List this matter for final hearing on 15^th December, 2005.

¶201

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶202

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶203

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶204

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶205

DATED 6TH OCTOBER, 2005

¶206

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005 (With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶207

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶208

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶209

BEFORE:

¶210

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶211

CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶212

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate

¶213

For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. Ltd.

¶214

: Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Mr.Ashish Jha and Ms.Simran Brar, Mr.Sarvesh Singh,Advocates for Karanjawala & Co.

¶215

O R D E R

¶216

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶217

13/20

¶218

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶219

6/7/2018

¶220

List on 28^th October,2005 for directions/further proceedings

¶221

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶222

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶223

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶224

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶225

DATED 22ND JULY, 2005

¶226

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶227

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶228

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶229

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶230

BEFORE:

¶231

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶232

CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶233

For Petitioner

¶234

: Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate

¶235

For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. Ltd.

¶236

: Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Mr.Ashish Jha and Ms.Simran Brar,Advocates

¶237

O R D E R

¶238

List on 12^th August,2005 for directions/further proceedings. Petitioner to produce proof of service on the 2^nd respondent in the meanwhile.

¶239

…….……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde)

¶240

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶241

14/20

¶242

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶243

6/7/2018

¶244

Chairperson

¶245

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶246

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶247

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶248

TH DATED 4 JULY, 2005

¶249

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶250

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶251

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶252

Star India Private Ltd.& Anr. …Respondents

¶253

BEFORE:

¶254

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE,

¶255

CHAIRPERSON MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶256

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent No.1- Star India Pvt. : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Ltd. Advocates

¶257

O R D E R

¶258

Counter filed by respondent no.1 as well as rejoinder filed thereto by petitioner is taken on record. Issue notice to 2^nd respondent returnable within two weeks.

¶259

To be listed on 22^nd July,2005 for directions/further proceedings.

¶260

……………..J (N. Santosh Hegde) Chairperson

¶261

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶262

15/20

¶263

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶264

6/7/2018

¶265

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶266

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶267

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶268

DATED 8TH APRIL, 2005

¶269

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶270

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶271

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd. …Respondent

¶272

BEFORE:

¶273

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.P. WADHWA, CHAIRPERSON

¶274

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶275

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Niharika Bahl Mr.Sarvesh,Advocates

¶276

O R D E R

¶277

On oral request of Mr.Bhagat, we implead Future Communications Network through Shri Man Mohan Singh Bajwa as Respondent No.2 in this proceedings. It is this party which has been nominated by Respondent No.1 as distributor to supply signals to the petitioner. Amended petition, a copy of which has been given to Mr.Gopal Jain, shall be filed today itself. Notice be issued to the 2^nd respondent. Notice may be taken dasti.

¶278

To be listed 16^th May, 2005 for directions/further proceedings.

¶279

……………..J (D.P. Wadhwa) Chairperson

¶280

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶281

16/20

¶282

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶283

6/7/2018

¶284

(Vinod Vaish) Member

¶285

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶286

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶287

ST DATED 21 MARCH, 2005

¶288

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶289

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶290

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd. …Respondent

¶291

BEFORE:

¶292

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶293

For Petitioner : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Ashish Jha and Ms.Niharika Bahl Advocates

¶294

O R D E R

¶295

We are informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the time of the last hearing, a map indicating the area of coverage and details of subscribers proposed to be served has been given to Respondent. In response, petitioner has received a communication from M/s. Star advising him to contact the distributor of M/s Star namely M/s Future Communications Network (FCN). Petitioner has given a reply indicating his difficulties in entering into any arrangements with FCN. Learned counsel for the petitioner also mentioned that M/s. FCN is having close linkages with rival a MSO in that area.

¶296

Respondent is given time to state all the facts in an affidavit and clearly indicate in the light of the reply given by the petitioner to the latest communication by M/S Star, how the advise given by it to the petitioner is the one which can help in compliance of the notification of TRAI. One week’s time is given for this purpose. Petitioner is given one week’s time thereafter to file his response thereto.

¶297

To be listed on 8^th April 2005 for directions/further proceedings.

¶298

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶299

17/20

¶300

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶301

6/7/2018

¶302

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶303

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶304

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶305

ST DATED 1 MARCH, 2005

¶306

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶307

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶308

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs

¶309

Star India Private Ltd. …Respondent

¶310

BEFORE:

¶311

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.P. WADHWA, CHAIRPERSON

¶312

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶313

For Petitioners : Mr.Vineet Bhagat with Mr.Santosh Kumar,Advocates For Respondent : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Meghna Mishra, Ms.Niharika Bahl and Mr.Ashish Jha,Advocates

¶314

O R D E R

¶315

We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner to some extent. Let him give the particulars as contained in the letter dated 17^th January,2005 of the respondent-Star (Page.37) within one week. To that, reply shall be sent by Star to the petitioner within a week thereafter. We hope that both parties will sit together and sort out the differences, if any, before the next date.

¶316

To be listed on 21st March,2005 for directions/further proceedings.

¶317

……………..J (D.P. Wadhwa) Chairperson

¶318

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶319

18/20

¶320

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶321

6/7/2018

¶322

(Vinod Vaish) Member

¶323

……………. (D.P.Sehgal) Member

¶324

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶325

DATED 8TH FEBRUARY, 2005

¶326

PETITION No.8(C) OF 2005

¶327

(With M.A.No.31 of 2005)

¶328

M/S Sky Vision …Petitioner Vs Star India Private Ltd. …Respondent

¶329

BEFORE:

¶330

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.P. WADHWA, CHAIRPERSON

¶331

MR. VINOD VAISH, MEMBER LT.GEN.D.P.SEHGAL(RETD.),MEMBER

¶332

For Petitioners : Mr.Vineet Bhagat,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Gopal Jain, Ms.Meghna Mishra, Ms.Niharika Bahl, Ms.Ruby Ahuja and Mr.Ashish Jha,Advocates

¶333

O R D E R

¶334

Issue notice. Mr.Jain accepts notice on behalf of respondent. Reply shall be filed within 15 days. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed at least two days before the next date.

¶335

To be listed on 1st March,2005 for directions/further proceedings.

¶336

……………..J (D.P. Wadhwa) Chairperson

¶337

………………. (Vinod Vaish) Member

¶338

file:///E:/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202006/Petition%20No.8(C)%20of%202005.htm

¶339

19/20

¶340

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL