written intimation was given to the respondents that the percentage of commission would be reduced from 20% to 15% and the minimum guarantee of 100 would also be withdrawn, but a copy thereof has not been filed. It is also of some significance to notice that the petitioner raises a contention that it was merely to give due credit for the commission in terms of the request as it had no contractual liability. Be that no contractual liability under the ISP agreements, it could not have reduced the percentage of commission or withdrew the minimum guarantee. On a question as to whether if he can show any payment in the ledger account, in regard to the minimum guarantee or 20% of the gross revenue, the witness pointed out to the entry dated 28.2.2004 marked separately as Exhibit ‘A’ but although according to him, the amount of Rs.10,846/- had been collected as per details given by the respondent, he had failed to give the break up thereof stating that the same can be produced. He also was unable to answer as to why the said breakup had not been filed in the proceeding. According to him, the operator used to ask for the internet commission for being adjusted against the cable subscription charges on the basis of the requisition slip, which we have noticed heretobefore, was not a plea which was originally taken. We may, for the aforementioned purpose, notice certain glaring discrepancies:-
