ITV

Category: Regulators

  • TDSAT wants to know from MIB if it can adjudicate on denial of security clearances to new TV channels

    TDSAT wants to know from MIB if it can adjudicate on denial of security clearances to new TV channels

    New Delhi: With the Home ministry holding that the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to examine the validity of denial of security clearances, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry has been asked to present its point of view.

    In a petition filed by Positiv TV Pvt. Ltd, chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said: “Before taking up the matter any further, we would like the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting also to make its stand clear. We accordingly direct Rajeev Sharma to file the reply on behalf of the ministry and listed the matter for 26 April.

    The Home ministry had filed its reply in which apart from contesting the petition on merits, it had raised objections to the maintainability of the petition before the tribunal taking the position that the tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to examine the validity of denial of security clearance to the petitioner.

    Earlier last year, the I and B ministry had said the Home ministry had in principle agreed that security clearances would not be needed for multi-system operators, but no such assurance was given with regard to those who had applied to start new television channels. 

  • HCs’ informed about SC decision to transfer all DAS cases to Delhi HC

    HCs’ informed about SC decision to transfer all DAS cases to Delhi HC

    NEW DELHI: The registry of the Supreme Court has finally sent to all the concerned high courts the directive of the apex court for transfer of all cases seeking extension to digital addressable system for cable television to Delhi High Court with a view to avoid conflicting decisions’.

    Court registry officials told indiantelevision.com that the order of the apex court of early this month had been sent on 16 April. A copy of the order was also sent to the Delhi High Court and it was now up to that court to fix a date.

    The officials said that the attempt would be to first receive from the various high courts the papers relating to the petitions, which almost all had pleaded shortage of set top boxes for seeking extension or stay of DAS which became effective 1 January 2016.

    Earlier, the apex court had accepted the plea of the central government that ‘it would be justand proper for this court to withdraw all those cases pending in different high courtsand transfer the same to Delhi High Court.’

    In its order of 1 April, justices V Gopala Gowda and Arjun Mishra had said on the transfer petition filed by the central government that ‘in future, if any case on the same legalquestion is filed before the high court(s), such case(s) shall also be transferred to theDelhi High Court’.

    The Supreme Court registry was directed to communicate the order tothe registrar general(s) of the respective high courts for transmitting the records of thecases pending before the respective high courts to Delhi High Court.

    The order took on record the fact that the All Sikkim Cable Operators Association
    had withdrawn from the High Court of Sikkim. The court also noted that one petitioner, JBM Cable Network, had refused to accept notice but this service would be considered sufficient. Ironically, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry had on 12 January written to its counsel in Punjab and Haryana High Court that it had understood the Hyderabad order to mean a pan India stay while asking him to defend the case.

    Buit later, the ministry sources admitted to indiantelevision.com that there was a misreading of the Bombay High Court directive. The Court had merely refereed to the Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd vs the Union of India 2004 case to say that if one high court gives a stay, another high court can act in similar fashion if the facts are similar – in this case, shortage of STBs. Thus, they agree that the high court stay was only confined to Maharashtra and not pan-India.

    Earlier, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation had withdrawn its petition after the Supreme Court said that the order of the Bombay High Court did not imply any pan-India stay.

    Meanwhile, cases are pending in the high courts of Bombay, Hyderabad (with separate petitions for Telengana and Andhra Pradesh), Allahabad, Assam, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh for the entire states, apart from Tamil Nadu where prolonged legal cases have been pending since Phase I.
    In Karnataka, three individual stakeholders have got stay orders in Mangalore and Mysore areas while there is no state-wide stay.

    The Bombay High Court had referred in its order to the argument by counsel that the Supreme Court in the Kusum Ingot case had said that if similar circumstances persist in other states, then they can pass an order similar to one passed by an earlier court.

  • HCs’ informed about SC decision to transfer all DAS cases to Delhi HC

    HCs’ informed about SC decision to transfer all DAS cases to Delhi HC

    NEW DELHI: The registry of the Supreme Court has finally sent to all the concerned high courts the directive of the apex court for transfer of all cases seeking extension to digital addressable system for cable television to Delhi High Court with a view to avoid conflicting decisions’.

    Court registry officials told indiantelevision.com that the order of the apex court of early this month had been sent on 16 April. A copy of the order was also sent to the Delhi High Court and it was now up to that court to fix a date.

    The officials said that the attempt would be to first receive from the various high courts the papers relating to the petitions, which almost all had pleaded shortage of set top boxes for seeking extension or stay of DAS which became effective 1 January 2016.

    Earlier, the apex court had accepted the plea of the central government that ‘it would be justand proper for this court to withdraw all those cases pending in different high courtsand transfer the same to Delhi High Court.’

    In its order of 1 April, justices V Gopala Gowda and Arjun Mishra had said on the transfer petition filed by the central government that ‘in future, if any case on the same legalquestion is filed before the high court(s), such case(s) shall also be transferred to theDelhi High Court’.

    The Supreme Court registry was directed to communicate the order tothe registrar general(s) of the respective high courts for transmitting the records of thecases pending before the respective high courts to Delhi High Court.

    The order took on record the fact that the All Sikkim Cable Operators Association
    had withdrawn from the High Court of Sikkim. The court also noted that one petitioner, JBM Cable Network, had refused to accept notice but this service would be considered sufficient. Ironically, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry had on 12 January written to its counsel in Punjab and Haryana High Court that it had understood the Hyderabad order to mean a pan India stay while asking him to defend the case.

    Buit later, the ministry sources admitted to indiantelevision.com that there was a misreading of the Bombay High Court directive. The Court had merely refereed to the Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd vs the Union of India 2004 case to say that if one high court gives a stay, another high court can act in similar fashion if the facts are similar – in this case, shortage of STBs. Thus, they agree that the high court stay was only confined to Maharashtra and not pan-India.

    Earlier, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation had withdrawn its petition after the Supreme Court said that the order of the Bombay High Court did not imply any pan-India stay.

    Meanwhile, cases are pending in the high courts of Bombay, Hyderabad (with separate petitions for Telengana and Andhra Pradesh), Allahabad, Assam, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh for the entire states, apart from Tamil Nadu where prolonged legal cases have been pending since Phase I.
    In Karnataka, three individual stakeholders have got stay orders in Mangalore and Mysore areas while there is no state-wide stay.

    The Bombay High Court had referred in its order to the argument by counsel that the Supreme Court in the Kusum Ingot case had said that if similar circumstances persist in other states, then they can pass an order similar to one passed by an earlier court.

  • TDSAT questions Dhru Lucky about relationship with GTPL Hathway, restrained from transfering any property

    TDSAT questions Dhru Lucky about relationship with GTPL Hathway, restrained from transfering any property

    NEW DELHI: Dhru Lucky Enterprise Pvt Ltd (Dhru) was today asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to file an affidavit clarifying that it will not transfer its movable or immovable properties to anyone while its case against Star India is pending. Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava asked Dhru representative Sureshbhai Jagubhai Patel to file the affidavit by this evening clarifying the relationship between Dhru and GTPL Hathway. This was a precondition to dispense with his personal appearance.

    After he filed the affidavit as directed by today evening, the tribunal listed the matter to come up on 4 May and exempted him from personal appearance.  Star India was represented by Counsel Arjun Natarajan and Dhru by counsel Upender Thakur.

    Dhru had filed a petition in October 2014 against Star India seeking renewal of lapsed agreements. Subsequently, the tribunal stayed disconnection notices issued to Dhru  by its orders of 12 November and 18 November that year. Dhru thereafter received signals within the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    However, Star India alleged that Dhru had been resorting to rampant piracy. In an order of 16 April 2015, Dhru gave an undertaking that it would confine its operation within the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    Subsequently, Star filed a contempt application against Dhru, on the ground that, in breach of the undertaking contained in order dated 16 April 2015 and it went beyond the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    Dhru was directed on 19 May last year to clearly explain on affidavit the circumstances under which it was operating in Vapi, which is beyond the areas mentioned in th lapsed agreements.

    The tribunal on 28 May last was told by Dhru that it has assigned its network at Vapi and Daman to some other entity, and that, it no longer wishes to carry on with its MSO business.

    Following that order, it was directed to file an affidavit as to its assignment to some other entity. On 17 July, it filed another affidavit where Dhru mentioned that TDSAT had been apprised on 28 May about GTPL Hathway taking over Dhru’s cable business in its entirety. Star India in response pleaded that Dhru was indulging in piracy even on 23 July. Subsequently, GTPL-Hathway was impleaded in the petition as it appeared that Dhru had assigned its business to the distributor.

    TDSAT had on 1 March this year directed the Dhru’s MD Sureshbhai Jagubhai Patel to be present in person. He was also directed to produce the instrument under which Dhru was said to have transferred its LCO business to GTPL-Hathway. However, Patel did not turn up on the next date as it was submitted on behalf of Dhru that Patel was now president of District Panchayat, Daman, and had no control over the activities of Dhru.

    However, the Tribunal directed on 28 March that Patel should be present in person along-with documents on 18 April. Patel was present yesterday and today and the matter was heard on both days.
     

     

  • TDSAT questions Dhru Lucky about relationship with GTPL Hathway, restrained from transfering any property

    TDSAT questions Dhru Lucky about relationship with GTPL Hathway, restrained from transfering any property

    NEW DELHI: Dhru Lucky Enterprise Pvt Ltd (Dhru) was today asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to file an affidavit clarifying that it will not transfer its movable or immovable properties to anyone while its case against Star India is pending. Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava asked Dhru representative Sureshbhai Jagubhai Patel to file the affidavit by this evening clarifying the relationship between Dhru and GTPL Hathway. This was a precondition to dispense with his personal appearance.

    After he filed the affidavit as directed by today evening, the tribunal listed the matter to come up on 4 May and exempted him from personal appearance.  Star India was represented by Counsel Arjun Natarajan and Dhru by counsel Upender Thakur.

    Dhru had filed a petition in October 2014 against Star India seeking renewal of lapsed agreements. Subsequently, the tribunal stayed disconnection notices issued to Dhru  by its orders of 12 November and 18 November that year. Dhru thereafter received signals within the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    However, Star India alleged that Dhru had been resorting to rampant piracy. In an order of 16 April 2015, Dhru gave an undertaking that it would confine its operation within the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    Subsequently, Star filed a contempt application against Dhru, on the ground that, in breach of the undertaking contained in order dated 16 April 2015 and it went beyond the areas mentioned in the lapsed agreements.

    Dhru was directed on 19 May last year to clearly explain on affidavit the circumstances under which it was operating in Vapi, which is beyond the areas mentioned in th lapsed agreements.

    The tribunal on 28 May last was told by Dhru that it has assigned its network at Vapi and Daman to some other entity, and that, it no longer wishes to carry on with its MSO business.

    Following that order, it was directed to file an affidavit as to its assignment to some other entity. On 17 July, it filed another affidavit where Dhru mentioned that TDSAT had been apprised on 28 May about GTPL Hathway taking over Dhru’s cable business in its entirety. Star India in response pleaded that Dhru was indulging in piracy even on 23 July. Subsequently, GTPL-Hathway was impleaded in the petition as it appeared that Dhru had assigned its business to the distributor.

    TDSAT had on 1 March this year directed the Dhru’s MD Sureshbhai Jagubhai Patel to be present in person. He was also directed to produce the instrument under which Dhru was said to have transferred its LCO business to GTPL-Hathway. However, Patel did not turn up on the next date as it was submitted on behalf of Dhru that Patel was now president of District Panchayat, Daman, and had no control over the activities of Dhru.

    However, the Tribunal directed on 28 March that Patel should be present in person along-with documents on 18 April. Patel was present yesterday and today and the matter was heard on both days.
     

     

  • TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has told the Department of Telecommunications that holding back some of the spectrum in 700 MHz (i.e. 15+15 MHz) from this auction and selling it after a gap of certain period of time from now would lead to non-utilization of this scarce natural resource for that period, though it has the potential to be reused and reallocated.

    Responding to a lengthy note by the DoT on various issues relating to auction of spectrum, the TRAI has by and large stuck to its original recommendations on most questions raised before it.

    It said any delay in award of spectrum or non-utilization of spectrum would turn into irreversible loss to the Government (in the form of levies and taxes) and to the society (in the form of better services, contribution to other related activities etc.).

    Even if it is assumed that greater revenue can be generated by auctioning a part of spectrum in 700 MHz band in future, deferring the revenue receipts now may not be of economic prudence keeping in view the impact of telecom services on the other sectors and overall GDP growth. Telecom connectivity is now the basic infrastructure in any society for networking, conveying important economic and social benefits.

    The Authority emphasised that the broadband connectivity is the first pillar of ‘Digital India’ Programme of the government, which can be fulfilled quickly if sufficient quantity of spectrum is made available. Further, National Telecom Policy-2012 envisages making available additional 300 MHz spectrum by the year 2017 and 500 MHz by the year 2020 for IMT services. If all the available spectrum is put to auction, it will result in increased availability of spectrum which will result in serving larger subscriber base, increased data speed as well as growth and overall increase in economic and other networked activities. This will result in more recurring revenue to the government in terms of license fee, spectrum usage charges, service tax, etc.

    Spectrum being a scarce resource, auction of spectrum is primarily to solve the allocative problem in an open, transparent manner and revenue maximization cannot be (and should not be) the only objective of auction where the Government is an auctioneer. The government has to a strike a balance between its fiscal targets and its responsibility to promote and encourage growth of the telecom sector.

    Presently, India is way behind in the broadband penetration and the internet speeds in the world and 700 MHz band can prove to be a vital band for proliferation of broadband in the country. In view of the above, the authority is of the opinion that entire spectrum in the 700 MHz band is required to be made available for commercial use without any delay. Accordingly, the authority reiterates its earlier recommendation that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

    The authority has been in favour of auctioning of all the available spectrum in entire LSA(s). However, the authority had recommended that partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available in at least 75% of total number of districts of the LSA including the state capital(s). As 1.0 MHz of spectrum in 1800 MHz band is available in entire service area of Rajasthan it should be put to auction. Moreover, DoT is carrying out process of harmonisation of spectrum in this band, therefore, issue of partial spectrum may not arise.

    It said telecom service providers feel that the escalation in the number of mobile drops, especially in urban and metro areas, can also be attributed to spectrum related issues, including shortage of spectrum supply. In order to serve the telecom needs of ever increasing subscriber base, the authority has recommended to DoT, from time to time, for making additional spectrum available in existing as well as new bands for commercial use. Further, in all the spectrum auctions held since 2012, the authority has been recommending to put to auction the entire available spectrum with the DoT. I

    As stated in the recommendations dated 27 January 2016, 700 MHz band is a sought after band for LTE deployment around the world due to its efficiency and higher penetration inside buildings. Due to lower frequency, it provides wider coverage which reduces number of towers required for setting up the LTE network and thus significantly cuts down capital expenditure involved in making the network live. In 42 countries commercial networks have been deployed in this band. After the assignment of spectrum in this band in India, it is expected that there will be an accelerated deployment of device eco-system due to ‘economies of scale’ that will be delivered on account of large subscriber base.

    The authority is of the view that if a service provider is not utilizing the administratively assigned spectrum without any justification, the licensor should take back the assigned spectrum.

    The DoT may take the legal opinion on the above issue and start the process of withdrawal of the spectrum separately. As soon as this spectrum becomes available, the same should be put to auction.

    The authority is of the opinion that there is no need for any modification in the provisions of the latest NIA with respect to block size and minimum quantum of spectrum that a new entrant/existing licenses/expiry licensee is required to bid for in 900/1800 MHz band. However, due to limited availability of spectrum in some LSAs in 900/1800 bands minimum spectrum, that a bidder is required to bid for, has been amended in these LSAs.

  • TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has told the Department of Telecommunications that holding back some of the spectrum in 700 MHz (i.e. 15+15 MHz) from this auction and selling it after a gap of certain period of time from now would lead to non-utilization of this scarce natural resource for that period, though it has the potential to be reused and reallocated.

    Responding to a lengthy note by the DoT on various issues relating to auction of spectrum, the TRAI has by and large stuck to its original recommendations on most questions raised before it.

    It said any delay in award of spectrum or non-utilization of spectrum would turn into irreversible loss to the Government (in the form of levies and taxes) and to the society (in the form of better services, contribution to other related activities etc.).

    Even if it is assumed that greater revenue can be generated by auctioning a part of spectrum in 700 MHz band in future, deferring the revenue receipts now may not be of economic prudence keeping in view the impact of telecom services on the other sectors and overall GDP growth. Telecom connectivity is now the basic infrastructure in any society for networking, conveying important economic and social benefits.

    The Authority emphasised that the broadband connectivity is the first pillar of ‘Digital India’ Programme of the government, which can be fulfilled quickly if sufficient quantity of spectrum is made available. Further, National Telecom Policy-2012 envisages making available additional 300 MHz spectrum by the year 2017 and 500 MHz by the year 2020 for IMT services. If all the available spectrum is put to auction, it will result in increased availability of spectrum which will result in serving larger subscriber base, increased data speed as well as growth and overall increase in economic and other networked activities. This will result in more recurring revenue to the government in terms of license fee, spectrum usage charges, service tax, etc.

    Spectrum being a scarce resource, auction of spectrum is primarily to solve the allocative problem in an open, transparent manner and revenue maximization cannot be (and should not be) the only objective of auction where the Government is an auctioneer. The government has to a strike a balance between its fiscal targets and its responsibility to promote and encourage growth of the telecom sector.

    Presently, India is way behind in the broadband penetration and the internet speeds in the world and 700 MHz band can prove to be a vital band for proliferation of broadband in the country. In view of the above, the authority is of the opinion that entire spectrum in the 700 MHz band is required to be made available for commercial use without any delay. Accordingly, the authority reiterates its earlier recommendation that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

    The authority has been in favour of auctioning of all the available spectrum in entire LSA(s). However, the authority had recommended that partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available in at least 75% of total number of districts of the LSA including the state capital(s). As 1.0 MHz of spectrum in 1800 MHz band is available in entire service area of Rajasthan it should be put to auction. Moreover, DoT is carrying out process of harmonisation of spectrum in this band, therefore, issue of partial spectrum may not arise.

    It said telecom service providers feel that the escalation in the number of mobile drops, especially in urban and metro areas, can also be attributed to spectrum related issues, including shortage of spectrum supply. In order to serve the telecom needs of ever increasing subscriber base, the authority has recommended to DoT, from time to time, for making additional spectrum available in existing as well as new bands for commercial use. Further, in all the spectrum auctions held since 2012, the authority has been recommending to put to auction the entire available spectrum with the DoT. I

    As stated in the recommendations dated 27 January 2016, 700 MHz band is a sought after band for LTE deployment around the world due to its efficiency and higher penetration inside buildings. Due to lower frequency, it provides wider coverage which reduces number of towers required for setting up the LTE network and thus significantly cuts down capital expenditure involved in making the network live. In 42 countries commercial networks have been deployed in this band. After the assignment of spectrum in this band in India, it is expected that there will be an accelerated deployment of device eco-system due to ‘economies of scale’ that will be delivered on account of large subscriber base.

    The authority is of the view that if a service provider is not utilizing the administratively assigned spectrum without any justification, the licensor should take back the assigned spectrum.

    The DoT may take the legal opinion on the above issue and start the process of withdrawal of the spectrum separately. As soon as this spectrum becomes available, the same should be put to auction.

    The authority is of the opinion that there is no need for any modification in the provisions of the latest NIA with respect to block size and minimum quantum of spectrum that a new entrant/existing licenses/expiry licensee is required to bid for in 900/1800 MHz band. However, due to limited availability of spectrum in some LSAs in 900/1800 bands minimum spectrum, that a bidder is required to bid for, has been amended in these LSAs.

  • BECIL directed by TDSAT to conduct fresh audit of Mumbai MSO in its petition against Sun Networks

    BECIL directed by TDSAT to conduct fresh audit of Mumbai MSO in its petition against Sun Networks

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has directed a fresh audit of the systems of JPR Channel, Mumbai, by the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd – BECIL – to check whether or not the system was compliant with the norms prescribed by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.

    BECIL had earlier done an audit and JPR Channel counsel J K Mehta claimed that the auditors’ report was “incomplete and only a draft report. Its findings are misconceived and whatever findings are recorded there can be fully explained.”

    Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. Chennai counsel Abhishek Malhotra said the auditor’s report had found very serious anomalies in the working of the petitioner’s system. Malhotra added that BECIL has already audited the petitioner’s system and found it non compliant with the statutory norms in a report of 26 February.

    Describing the natter as a serious dispute, Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said that BECI should conduct a thorough audit of the petitioner’s system and to submit its report. If desired, BECIL shall allow a representative of Sun to be present at the time of the audit.

    The Tribunal hoped and expected that BECIL would submit its report within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of its order. The audit fee will be initially paid by the the MSO but depending upon the report, it may be suitably apportioned or Sun itself may be held liable to pay the entire fee. The Tribunal listed the matter for 10 May.

  • BECIL directed by TDSAT to conduct fresh audit of Mumbai MSO in its petition against Sun Networks

    BECIL directed by TDSAT to conduct fresh audit of Mumbai MSO in its petition against Sun Networks

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has directed a fresh audit of the systems of JPR Channel, Mumbai, by the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd – BECIL – to check whether or not the system was compliant with the norms prescribed by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.

    BECIL had earlier done an audit and JPR Channel counsel J K Mehta claimed that the auditors’ report was “incomplete and only a draft report. Its findings are misconceived and whatever findings are recorded there can be fully explained.”

    Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. Chennai counsel Abhishek Malhotra said the auditor’s report had found very serious anomalies in the working of the petitioner’s system. Malhotra added that BECIL has already audited the petitioner’s system and found it non compliant with the statutory norms in a report of 26 February.

    Describing the natter as a serious dispute, Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said that BECI should conduct a thorough audit of the petitioner’s system and to submit its report. If desired, BECIL shall allow a representative of Sun to be present at the time of the audit.

    The Tribunal hoped and expected that BECIL would submit its report within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of its order. The audit fee will be initially paid by the the MSO but depending upon the report, it may be suitably apportioned or Sun itself may be held liable to pay the entire fee. The Tribunal listed the matter for 10 May.

  • Canara Star asked by TDSAT to pay Star India Rs 18.91 lakh subject to final outcome of dispute

    Canara Star asked by TDSAT to pay Star India Rs 18.91 lakh subject to final outcome of dispute

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has directed  Canara Star Communications Pvt Ltd Karnataka, to pay to Star India a sum of Rs.18.91 lakhs for both Kumta and Bhatkal up to 3 March 2016.

    Chairman  Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said “These payments are interim and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either party.”

    Rejecting the plea by the multi-system operator that it was entitled to a further reduction of 15 per cent in the monthly subscription amount fixed under the expired agreements as a result of the setting aside of the Tariff Order by TRAI that allowed 15 per cent enhancement to the MSOs, the tribunal fixed the matter for further hearing on 19 April.

    The tribunal noted that there is no material to prima facie substantiate this assertion and saw no reason to allow any further reduction in the dues which the petitioner could be liable to pay to the respondent as an interim measure.

    Canara Star had originally come before the tribunal against disconnection notices by Star India as for default in payment. One of the grounds on which the disconnection notice were challenged was that another MSO had started operating in those areas and as a result the petitioner’s subscriber base had gone down substantially and the petitioner had been making request for downgradation of its subscriber base and consequently a reduction in the fixed fee payable by it as monthly subscription fee.  There appeared to be some substance in the petitioner’s grievance and on a joint request, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre.

    The tribunal was informed that before the Mediation Centre, the parties were able to arrive at some understanding in regard to Kumta and Bhatkal areas but Canara Star was also getting signals from Star India for transmission in the DAS area of Bangalore and there too the MSO happened to be in default in payment of the subscription fees.

    Star India wanted a comprehensive settlement that should cover both analogue and digital areas covering not only Kumta and Bhatkal but Bangalore also. A comprehensive settlement, as desired by Star India could not take place and the matter came back to the tribunal.

    The subscription agreement between the parties relating to Kumta and Bhatkal came to end on 31 June 2015.  Under the subscription agreement, the petitioner was liable to pay the monthly subscription fee at the rate of Rs.2,60,081 per month for Kumta and Rs.2,10,716 per month for Bhatkal.  In February 2015 when the petition was filed before the Tribunal the dues against the petitioner amounted to Rs.32.95 lakhs for both Kumta and Bhatkal. By order of 3 February 2015, the petitioner was directed to make payment of the aforesaid amount in two installments subject to which Star India was directed not to disconnect the supply of its signals to Canara Star. Thereafter, the MSO had made some further payments of admitted dues in terms of orders passed by the tribunal from time to time and it continues to receive the signals for transmission in those areas.

    No fresh subscription agreement has so far been executed between the parties.

    According to the respondent, at the rate fixed under the expired agreement, its dues against the MSO now amount to Rs.48.94 lakhs for both Kumta and Bhatkal. Star India counsel Kunal Tandon however submitted that in course of the mediation proceedings, Star India had agreed to give the MSO a discount of Rs.1,07,305 per month for Kumta area and Rs.67,703 for Bhatkal area with effect from November 2014.  He submitted that if computations are made taking into account the discount to which the respondent had agreed and computing the monthly subscription fees after allowing the discounts, the dues would come to Rs.18.91 lakhs for both Kumta and Bhatkal upto 31.03.2016.

    However, Canara Star counsel Tushar Singh wanted further reduction of 15 per cent in the monthly subscription amount fixed under the expired agreements as a result of the setting aside of the Tariff Order by TRAI that allowed 15 per cent enhancement to the MSOs.