Sri Sumangali Digital Communication India Pvt. Ltd. v. Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd.

TDSAT10 Oct 2014BROADCASTING PETITION/231/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, appointed Mr. Sharath Sampath as an Advocate Commissioner to conduct a ground verification survey in Gulbarga District. The survey aims to ascertain the total market, the petitioner's share, and the number of affiliated LCOs to resolve a dispute over unequal subscription fees.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Sharath Sampath as Advocate Commissioner to conduct ground verification survey in Gulbarga District.

Sri Sumangali Digital Communication India Pvt. Ltd. vs Sun… — Intellectual Property | TDSAT (2014)

¶1

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI

¶2

Dated 10^th October, 2014

¶3

MA No. 251 of 2014 in

¶4

Petition No. 231(C) of 2014

¶5

M/s Sri Sumangali Digital Communication India Pvt. Ltd., Gulbarga, Karnataka … Petitioner Vs.

¶6

SUN Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. … Respondents

¶7

BEFORE:

¶8

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AFTAB ALAM, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. KULDIP SINGH, MEMBER

¶9

For Petitioner : Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Angad Singh Dugal, Advocate

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The present M.A. has been filed by the petitioner/applicant praying, inter-alia, for appointing a Local Commissioner for conducting ground verification in the city of Gulbarga. As per the petitioner / applicant, though 70% of the LCOs are with the other MSO, namely Raghavendra Enterprises, the petitioner is being asked to pay subscription fee which is in excess of what is being paid by the other MSO.

¶12

Petitioner is a MSO operating in the District of Gulbarga and surrounding rural areas. Respondent No. 1 is a broadcaster. Earlier the

¶13

¶14

petitioner had filed petition [231(C) of 2014] challenging the disconnection notices dated 25.03.2014 and 13.4.2014 issued by respondent no. 1 under clauses 4.1 and 4.3 of the Regulations. Vide order dated 31.7.2014, the Tribunal had made an interim arrangement as per which a monthly subscription of Rs. 1.5 lakhs is to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent.

¶15

During the course of hearing the M.A., the counsel for the parties jointly proposed the name of Mr. Sharath Sampath, Advocate to be appointed as Advocate Commissioner to conduct the ground verification in the city of Gulbarga. Mr. Sampath has consented for the same.

¶16

Accordingly, it is directed that Mr. Sharath Sampath be appointed as Advocate Commissioner to conduct the survey in which both the parties may also participate.

¶17

The survey may be conducted to ascertain the following :

¶18

(a) The total market i.e. number of households with TV in Gulbarga District.

¶19

(b) Share of the petitioner in the market and number of LCOs affiliated with the petitioner.

¶20

¶21

¶22

Respondent No. 1 is also permitted to suggest additional areas, if

¶23

any, for conducting the survey as above.

¶24

Mr. Sampath will be paid an honorarium of Rs. 15000/- in addition to actual expenses in regard to travel and stay. The honorarium and expenses shall be shared equally between the petitioner and the respondent. Mr. Sampath may complete the survey within two weeks and submit the survey report before the next date of hearing.

¶25

Put up under the heading “for directions” on 11.11.2014.

¶26

………………. (Aftab Alam) Chairperson

¶27

….………………. (Kuldip Singh) Member

¶28

/NC/

Sri Sumangali Digital Communication India Pvt. Ltd. v. Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sumangali Digital Communication India Pvt. Ltd. v. Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neo Sports Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. vs Bikaji Cable Network

Neo Sports Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. vs International Cable Tv.Network

Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd. vs Star Sports India Pvt. Ltd.

Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd. vs Taj Television (India) Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Noida Software Technology Park Ltd. vs M/S Sindhi Kachchhi Entertainment Corporation Ltd.

Taj Television (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Sai Cable

Taj Television (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Varadraj Cable Network (Belgaum)

Msm Discovery Pvt. Ltd. vs Singh Cable Network

Dish Tv India Ltd. vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

Bharat Business Channel Ltd. vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

Neo Sports Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. vs International Cable Tv.Network

Taj Television (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Usa Cablenet

Honey Sky Vision vs Broadcast Initiatives Ltd.

Msm Discovery Pvt. Ltd. vs Sakshi Cable Networks