In the technical sense, when the agent, the broadcasters, the MSO, the Cable Operator receive signals from the broadcaster for onward transmission to the ultimate consumer, these players may also be termed as consumers in that sense because the signals received by them get consumed by retransmission to another player in the hierarchy but that is not consumption contemplated under the TRAI Act and Regulation. To become an ultimate consumer that retransmission cannot be treated as consumption because consumption contemplated in this situation gets completed with the viewing of the signals without further transmission, which can only happen when the ultimate subscriber uses the signals for his viewing purposes. All other intermediaries as stated in the Anwarkhan Mehboob case (supra) as also Morgan Stanley (supra) cannot be either subscribers or consumers. On facts, we have noticed that the hotel managements, who are members of the petitioner associations, receive signals either from the broadcaster or their agents directly or from the cable operators directly which is further transmitted to rooms and parlours for the purpose of viewing by their guests or clients, it is at that stage that the signals actually get consumed. Therefore, as per the judicial and dictionary definition of the consumer referred to hereinabove, we have no doubt that the members of the petitioner associations are not the end-users of the signals received by them. Hence, these members of the petitioner associations on the facts of this case cannot be treated as either subscribers or consumers for the purpose of relief sought in this petition.
