Tata Teleservice Ltd. v. Ministry of Communications & It

TDSAT29 Sept 2010TELECOM PETITION/15/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tata Teleservices filed a petition regarding spectrum interference caused by CATV operators on its CDMA network. The Tribunal observed the technical overlap between bandwidths and suggested regulatory dialogue but disposed of the petition with comments rather than granting specific interim reliefs like license cancellation or penalty enforcement.

What the court decided

AI extract

Tata Teleservice Ltd. vs Ministry of Communications & It — Writ and Judicial Review | TDSAT (2010)

¶1

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

¶2

6/7/2018

¶3

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

¶4

NEW DELHI

¶5

Dated 29^th September, 2010 Pe��on No.15 of 2009

¶6

Tata Teleservices Limited …Pe��oner Versus

¶7

Ministry of Communica�ons and IT & Ors. ...Respondents

¶8

BEFORE:

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.B.SINHA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR.G. D. GAIHA, MEMBER HON’BLE MR. P.K.RASTOGI, MEMBER For Pe��oner : Mr. Mansoor Ali Shoket, Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr.Mirza Aslam Beg,Advocate for Ms.Sonia Sharma,Advocate Mr.Maha Singh,AWA Ms.Revathi, AWA,WPC For Respondent No.3 : Mr.Sachin Da�a, Advocate For Respondent No.4 : Mr.Meet Malhotra, Advocate

¶10

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

1/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

For Respondent Nos.6 to 16 : Ms.Vandana Jai Singh, Advocate Mr.Sachin Da�a, Advocate For Respondent No. 17-MSO : Mr.Vibhav Srivastava, Advocate Alliance For Respondent No.18 -AUSPI : Ms. Manjula Gandhi, Advocate

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

S.B. Sinha

¶17

The pe��oner is a licensee; the license having been granted by the First Respondent in terms of the provisions contained in Sec�on 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (the Act).

¶18

It, in terms of the licenses granted in its favour, is engaged in the business of telecommunica�on by providing both GSM and CDMA services to its customers.

¶19

Inter alia, on the premise that the cable service operators, be it mul�-service operators and/or the cable service operators while laying down the overhead cables while using the electric and telephone polls cause spectrum interference, this pe��on has been filed.

¶20

In this pe��on, apart from the Ministry of Communica�on & Informa�on Technology, Department of Telecommunica�on, the Ministry of Informa�on & Broadcas�ng have been impleaded as par�es. They are said to have

¶21

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

2/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

failed/neglected to control the opera�on of mul�-system operators or the cable operators opera�ng out of the areas wherein such spectrum interference has been no�ced.

¶26

In this pe��on inter alia the following reliefs have been prayed for:-

¶27

“(a) Direct the Respondent No.1 to 4 and other concerned authori�es to take all necessary steps to ensure that the Spectrum allocated to the Pe��oner and its beneficial enjoyments/u�liza�on thereof is unrestricted, unconstrained, uninterrupted and interference-free from any manner whatsoever.

¶28

(b) Direct Respondent No.1 to 4 to take immediate steps as per the applicable laws and take immediate remedial ac�ons with regard to the problem of spectrum interference faced by the Pe��oner.

¶29

(c) Direct Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.3 to forthwith cancel the licenses/cash registra�on of Respondent No.5-16 on account of their failure to comply with Regula�on 10 of The Cable Television Networks (Regula�on) Act 1995.

¶30

(d) Direct DOT to disclose what steps it has taken pursuant to the complaints (Re: Spectrum Interference) made by the pe��oner and what future steps it proposes to ensure interference free spectrum.

¶31

(e) Declare that the pe��oner would not be held responsible in breach of License (Re: Condi�on 28 – Quality of Performance) and Clause 4 of the Regula�on on quality of service of Basic and Cellular Mobile Services, 2005.

¶32

(f) Direct the Respondent No.1 to create a mechanism as illustrated in Para 21 to ensure that such spectrum interference in future is inves�gated and remedial ac�on is taken in a �me bound manner (within 4 weeks) from making a complaint including prosecu�on of such offenders under Sec�on 16 of The Cable Television Networks (Regula�on) Act, 1995.

¶33

(g) Direct the Respondent No.5 to 16 to abide by Sec�on 10 of Cable Television Networks (Regula�on) Act, 1995 and ensure that their amplifiers do not interfere in the telecommunica�on spectrum allo�ed to the pe��oner.”

¶34

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

3/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

In support of its statement in the pe��on, the pe��oner has placed the CATV alloca�on in Band-5 overlapping with CDMA frequency band of 824-844/869-889 MHz vis-à-vis the CATV frequency band-5, which reads as under:

¶39

“CATV Frequency

¶40

2. CATV frequency allocated in Band V overlaps with the CDMA frequency band of 824-844/869-889 MHz. The CATV frequency Band V is given in the Table below:

¶41

*Channel*	*Bandwidth*	*Video*	*Sound*
38	606-614	607.25	607.25
39	614-622	615.25	615.25
40	622-630	623.25	623.25
41	630-638	631.25	631.25
42	638-646	639.25	639.25
43	646-654	647.25	647.25
44	654-662	655.25	655.25
45	662-670	663.25	663.25
46	670-678	671.25	671.25
47	678-686	679.25	679.25
48	686-694	687.25	687.25
49	694-702	695.25	695.25
50	702-710	703.25	703.25

¶42

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

4/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

51	710-718	711.25	711.25
52	718-726	719.25	719.25
53	726-734	727.25	727.25
54	734-742	735.25	735.25
55	742-750	743.25	743.25
56	750-758	751.25	751.25
57	758-766	759.25	759.25
58	766-774	767.25	767.25
59	774-782	775.25	775.25
60	782-790	783.25	783.25
61	790-798	791.25	791.25
62	798-806	799.25	799.25
63	806-814	807.25	807.25
64	814-822	815.25	815.25
65	822-830	823.25	823.25
66	830-838	831.25	831.25
67	838-846	839.25	839.25
68	846-854	847.25	847.25
69	854-862	855.25	855.25”

¶47

The respondent Nos.5 to 16, according to the pe��oner, use poor quality amplifiers which is said to be viola�ve of Sec�on 10 of the Cable Television Networks (Regula�on) Act, 1995.

¶48

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

5/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

The pe��oner in this pe��on has inter alia contended as under:

¶53

“3. The TV signal, modulated on carriers falling in the CDMA band, are carried through the co-axial cable and amplified at regular interval. The major cause of leakage of CATV signal is the poor quality/worn out amplifiers normally improperly installed on the poles or roo�ops. The leaking signal from such amplifiers causes interference in the CDMA network as these signals can be picked-up by nearby BTS Towers used for CDMA network.

¶54

4. It is seen from the above Table that CATV channel 66 & 67 (830 – 846 MHz) falls in the Up-Link band of CDMA (824-844 MHz). These two channels are the main source of interference for the CDMA cellular service. CATV operators modulate the TV channel on these two carriers and transmit it through the cable network. The power content of these two channels is very high and when they leak through the poor quality amplifier they cause severe interference in the CDMA Up-Link channels. Other than these two main channels, there are harmonics and spurious emission from the CATV system which also causes interference in the CDAM cellular service.

¶55

Impact of Interference

¶56

5. The major effect of CATV interference is in call drops and failure in call setup. It is per�nent to men�on that interference in our CDMA carriers seriously impacts the load on all the network elements, thus deteriora�ng network performance. This in turn impacts QoS and increase customer dissa�sfac�on/complaints. The details of some of the cable operators which are interfering the frequency of TTSL which is resul�ng in average call drop rate and average call set up failure rate are depicted in a tabular chart herein below:-

¶57

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

6/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

*Circle* *Name*	*City Name*	*Name of Cable* *Operator*	*TTSL* *frequency* *which* is *being* *interfered*	*Areas* *affected* *due* to *interference* *from* *cable* *operators*	*Average* *Drop* *Call* *Rate for* *affected* *areas* *[%]*	*Average* *Call Set* up *Failures* *[%]*
Delhi	Delhi	Si� Cable, *Indusland* *Media &* *Communica�on* *Ltd. ,*Karol Bagh Network Private Limited, The Pooja Cable, M/s Den Ltd., M/s Jay Amba Cable Network, M/s Nelson Communica�on Ltd. & The Yadav Cable & other local cable operators	Ch 492 [839.274 MHz] most effected, 836.77 MHz, 835.683 MHz	Karol Bagh, Patel Nagar, Jahangirpuri, Ashok Vihar, Sector-17, Gurgaon	12% to 35%	2.7% to 6.3%
West Bengal	Kolkata	Prakash Cable Centre &Kolkata Cable Network	Ch. 228 [833.03 MHz – 834.26 MHz]	Terity Bazar, Salt Lake Area, Bagri Marker, Bara Bazar, MG Road	3.4% to 11%	6% to 21%

¶62

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

7/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

Gujarat	Ahmedabad	Gujarat Telelink Pvt. Ltd. (GTPIL) &*In Cable*	Ch. 42[825.64 MHz- 826.87 Mhz], Ch.226 [831.16 MHz-832.39MHz], Ch.1[824.41MHz– 825.64 MHz]	Shahibau Isanpur, Cross Ghodasa Rd. Maninag Sabarma Naroda-n Airport Sola Rd., etc.	g, Anjali Rd., r, CG Narol, ar, �, r. area, Thaltej	1% to 2.69%	1.12% to 2.16%
Punjab	Amritsar	Unknown	Ch.512[839.745MHz to 840.975 MHz]	Fatehgar Churian, Dhanipur Majitha, Baba Na	h ,Ajnala, Dera nak	7% to 23%	3.4% to 4.18%

¶67

Status of CATV Interference

¶68

6. TTSL had started experiencing CATV interference in its Delhi Network since October 2007. Therea�er, it had spread to other places like Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Bangalore, Kerala, Hyderabad etc. TTSL in�mated all concerned through various le�ers including Wireless Monitoring Organiza�on (WMO), a wing of DOT responsible for resolving interference issues, WPC and TRAI regarding impact of degrada�on of quality of service due to CATV interference. WMO has carried out interference measurement at number of places on several occasions and confirmed the source of interference as CATV signals. WMO has asked these CATV operators to switch off the interfering channels. Therea�er, the interference level has gone down. However, the approach followed by WMO, by asking CATV operator to switch off the channel transmi�ng at CDMA carrier allo�ed to TTSL, is not yielding the desired result in controlling the interference. On direc�on from WMO officials; local CATV operators switch off the culprit channel only for a short dura�on of 1-2 hours and therea�er, when these officials leave the site, they

¶69

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

8/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

again switch on the channel. Thus, the effort put in by WMO result in respite from interference only for 1-2 hours. One of the permanent remedial measures could be to stop transmission of CATV signal from the Head End at CDMA carrier allo�ed to TTSL in the affected areas.”

¶74

The respondents Nos.1 and 2 in their affidavit have, inter alia, contended that the Department of Telecommunica�ons, Ministry of Communica�ons and Informa�on Technology had requested the Ministry of Informa�on & Broadcas�ng to amend the relevant rules framed under Cable TV Networks Regula�on Act, 1995, so as to incorporate “penal ac�on may be taken by Wireless Planning & Coordina�on Wing, Department of Telecommunica�ons, Ministry of Communica�ons and IT under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 in case interference is observed to wireless licensed telecom service.”

¶75

The Respondent No.3 has also filed an affidavit affirmed by one Mr.Navil Kapur. In the said reply it had been contended:

¶76

“1. That the Ministry is in receipt of sugges�on dated 10^th may, 2010 of the Wireless Planning and Coordina�on Wing in the Ministry of Communica�on & IT to amend ‘The Cable TV Network Regula�on Act, 1995, to incorporate penal ac�on under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 for causing interference to licensed telecom services’.

¶77

2. That the respondent herein has been considering the recommenda�ons of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India on restructuring of cable services and considering comprehensive amendments in the Cable TV Act. The sugges�on of the respondent Department of Telecommunica�on rela�ng to amendment in the Act is being considered along with other amendments in the Cable TV Act.

¶78

3. That since amending the provisions of the Cable Act are likely to take some �me in the interim and as has been suggested in the Affidavit filed by this Respondent earlier, the Wireless Monitoring Organisa�on can furnish

¶79

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

9/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

evidence with regard to viola�ons of Sec�on 10 of the Cable Act to the authorized officers under the Cable Act so that complaint can be lodged by them in a competent Court for criminal ac�on.”

¶84

The private respondents, however, while denying and dispu�ng that any interference is being caused in the CATV frequency bands, contend that the provisions of the 1995 Act are sufficient to deal with a situa�on of this nature.

¶85

Cable television is one of the systems to provide television to the consumers. The signals of the broadcasters put up through satellite or otherwise are transmi�ed to the headends except in the case of direct-to-home consumers. While effec�ng re-transmission, the MSOs or big LCOs are required to do so through fixed op�cal fibres or coaxial cables for transmission of radio frequency signals as opposed to digital methods used in television broadcas�ng wherefor a television antenna is required.

¶86

The centrally placed headend amplifiers necessary for opera�ng CATV systems, are to be connected with very long cables for reaching the television sets of the subscribers. For mee�ng the technical requirement, namely, to boost the signals headend, amplifiers at regular intervals are installed for the purpose of boos�ng the strength of signal and make them acceptable to the television sets. For the said purpose, it is possible that signals are amplified by using 30 to 40 amplifiers before it reaches the subscribers’ premises. The cable television headend is a master facility for receiving television signals for processing and distribu�on over a cable television system. The signals are therea�er mixed in accordance with the cable system channels numbering scheme using a series of cable modulators. They in turn are fed into a mul�plier or signal

¶87

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

10/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

combiner. The mixed signals are then sent into a broadband mul�plier and then sent into the cable system by the trunk line and con�nuously applied in stages as per the system requirement. The modulator input signals and modula�on to a specific radio frequency which fall in CDMA frequency band 824-844 MHz/869-889 MHz.

¶92

The Parliament enacted Cable Television Act, 1995 (1995 Act).

¶93

While the Ministry of Telecommunica�on deals with the ma�ers rela�ng to grant of licenses to the licensees in terms of the provisions of the Act, the ma�ers rela�ng to grant of permissions to the mul�-system operators, broadcasters and other distributors are governed by the 1995 Act.

¶94

The 1995 Act also provides for the ma�ers which are required to be dealt with for viola�on of the provisions of the said

¶95

Act.

¶96

We may no�ce Sec�on 10 thereof, which reads as under:

¶97

“10. Cable television network not to interfere with any telecommunication system.— Every cable operator shall ensure that the cable television network being operated by him does not interfere, in any way, with the functioning of the authorised telecommunication systems.”

¶98

Sec�on 16 of the said Act provides for a penal provision. However, Sec�on 18 thereof provides that a court may take cognizance of an offence under Sec�on 16 of the Act, if a complaint is filed by the authorized officers.

¶99

The term ‘authorized officers’ is defined in Sec�on 2(a) of the Act which reads as under:

¶100

“2. Definitions.— In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

¶101

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

11/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

[1] [ (a) ‘authorised officer’ means, within his local limits of jurisdic�on;-

¶106

(i) a District Magistrate, or

¶107

(ii) a Sub-divisional Magistrate, or

¶108

(iii) a Commissioner of Police,

¶109

and includes any other officer no�fied in the Official Gaze�e, by the Central Government or the State Government, to be an authorised officer for such local limits of jurisdic�on as may be determined by that Government;]”

¶110

The private operators like the pe��oners, therefore, have no independent right to make a complaint although viola�ons of the provisions of the said Act may be no�ced by them. It invariably is required to approach the authorized officers who by the nature of the office they hold may not be expert persons. Be that as it may, in terms of the provisions of the 1995 Act, therefore, only the authorized officers are empowered to file a complaint pe��on so as to enable a Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence.

¶111

When a criminal complaint is filed, successful comple�on thereof may not only require examina�on of the complainant but also examina�on of the witnesses who would be able to prove the commission of an offence.

¶112

Indisputably, no immediate ac�on can be taken. There if no �me-limit within which a criminal complaint can be dealt with or for allowing a criminal case to reach to its logical conclusion one way or the other. Till such �me viola�ons of the Act

¶113

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

12/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

may con�nue. On the other hand, an innocent person may also be prosecuted although he may not have any hand in commission of the alleged offence.

¶118

Telecommunica�on services on the one hand, and Broadcas�ng and Cable Services on the other, although are governed by the same Act, are looked a�er by two different Ministries. There are different hierarchies of officers, their viewpoints may be different.

¶119

The respondent No.1 as also the respondent No.3 feels that the 1995 Act should be amended. What should be the nature of the amendment is not a ma�er which comes within the domain of this Tribunal.

¶120

It is not competent or even otherwise has any hand for asking the Parliament to amend the Act one way or the other.

¶121

However, as in some countries, it is possible for this Tribunal to enter into a dialogue of the nature as has been done in the instant case. In our opinion, the concerned departments have taken a right approach but we are not very sure when the Parliament would be able to amend the Act and/or what would be the contours of such amendment.

¶122

We may, however, no�ce that according to the pe��oner a provision should be made which is akin to the provision governing “the� of electrical energy” under Electricity Act, 2003 being Sec�on 135 in terms whereof the Government can

¶123

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

13/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

authorize some of the officers of the private telecom operators above a par�cular rank to act as authorized officers and to monitor the interference and lodge complaints before the appropriate forum.

¶128

The pe��oner may be jus�fied in contending that even the power of search and seizure should be given to the above officers with suitable checks and balances. It is not for us to endorse such sugges�ons nor any comment in respect thereof.

¶129

The ques�on which arises for considera�on, moreover, involves technologies.

¶130

Despite the fact that the Government of India and/or the authorized officers are required to constantly monitor the system so as to find out as to whether interference is being caused to CDMA frequency resul�ng in disturbance in carrying out the telecommunica�on services by the licensees is a ma�er which requires an empirical study.

¶131

The Central Government in exercise of its power conferred upon it under the proviso appended to Sec�on 2(k) of the Indian Telegraph Act has issued a no�fica�on on or about 07.01.2000 in lieu whereof, the ‘Broadcas�ng and Cable Services’ have been brought within the purview of the ‘Telecommunica�on Services’.

¶132

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) in exercise of its powers conferred upon it under Sec�on 11(1)(b) of the TRAI Act, 1997 is en�tled to make regula�ons both in respect of ‘Telecommunica�on Services’ which is stricto sensu are covered by the Indian Telegraph Act as also the ‘Broadcas�ng and Cable Services’ which are deemed to be ‘Telecommunica�on Services’ by reason of the aforemen�oned no�fica�on.

¶133

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

14/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

Although, TRAI had made various regula�ons regula�ng both ‘Telecommunica�on Services’ as also ‘Broadcas�ng and Cable Services’, it is yet to make any regula�on which covers both the services.

¶138

Convergence of the services although is a known phenomenon in the industry in other countries, neither the Parliament nor TRAI had made any Act or any regula�ons in this behalf.

¶139

The Central Government made Convergence Bill as far as back in the year 2000. For one reason or the other the Convergence Bill had not been placed before the Parliament.

¶140

This Tribunal by reason of interpreta�ve process has tried to do something in this behalf (Pe��on No.172 of 2009 [Star (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.] disposed of on 22.01.2010)

¶141

Keeping in view the fact that the technological aspects of the ma�er cannot be ignored being its crux, we would request TRAI to frame regula�ons in this behalf upon obtaining comments/sugges�ons from all the stakeholders during

¶142

the consulta�on process. This, however, shall not mean that the authorized officers under the 1995 Act need not proceed against the offenders for viola�on of Sec�on 10 thereof and appropriate ac�ons may not be taken in this behalf.

¶143

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

15/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

We may only place on record that the sugges�ons have also been made by the pe��oner that WMO should be authorized to levy penalty on the cable TV operators if radio frequency leakage beyond specified limits is detected. This aspect may also be studied.

¶148

We hope and trust that not only the Ministry of Informa�on and Broadcas�ng, the Ministry of Law and Ministry of Telecommunica�on and Informa�on Technology, TRAI as also the authorized officers shall apply their mind and take appropriate ac�on in this behalf.

¶149

For the aforemen�oned purpose, TRAI may also hold a mee�ng between the concerned officers of the Ministry of Informa�on & Broadcas�ng as also the Department of Telecom, some big MSOs like the respondents No.5 to 16 as also the well known CDMA operators. It certainly can invite in the said mee�ng, if not of the individual operators and licensees, at least their associa�ons.

¶150

We hope and trust that apart from the concerned Ministries, all concerned shall take appropriate steps in this behalf at least to know the viewpoints of all the stake holders.

¶151

This pe��on is disposed of with the aforemen�oned observa�ons.

¶152

Let the Registry send a copy of this order to the respondents herein as also TRAI.

¶153

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

16/17

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

6/7/2018

…………….....J (S.B. Sinha) Chairperson

¶158

…………….....

¶159

(G. D. Gaiha) Member

¶160

…………….....

¶161

(P.K. Rastogi) Member

¶162

rkc/sks

¶163

[1] Inserted by the Cable Tekevision Networks (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2000, with effect from 1.9.2000.

¶164

file:///D:/JUDGEMANT%20TDSAT/all%20judgement%20year%20wise/judgement%202010/29.09.2010/PNo.15of09.htm

¶165

17/17

Tata Teleservice Ltd. v. Ministry of Communications & It

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Tata Teleservice Ltd. v. Ministry of Communications & It

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tata Communications Limited vs Union of India

Idea Cellular Ltd. vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.

Gail (India) Ltd. vs M/S Digital 2 Virtual Isp Pvt. Ltd.

Power Grid Corporation of India vs M/S Sab Infotech Ltd.

Bharti Airtel Limited vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr.

Hughes Communications India Limited vs Union of India

Hfcl Infotel Ltd. vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr.

Videocon Telecommunication Ltd. vs Union of India

Kumarina Investment Ltd. vs Digital Media Convergence Ltd.

Super Cable Network vs Sanjay Cable Network

VIACOM18 Media Pvt. Ltd. vs Msm Discovery India Pvt. Ltd.

Sreedevi Digital System Pvt. Ltd. vs Channel Plus

M/S Guntur Communications Network Private Ltd. vs Eswara Cable Vision

Kolkata Cable & Broaband Pariseva Ltd. vs G- Net Cable Tv Network