Category: Supreme Court

  • SC stays J&K HC order to not prohibit outside food in theatre

    SC stays J&K HC order to not prohibit outside food in theatre

    MUMBAI: The Supreme Court has stayed a direction issued by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court to the multiplexes/cinema hall owners of the state not to prohibit cinema goers/viewers from carrying their own food articles and water inside the theatre, as per a report by the Indian Express.

    The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir passed the order on 18 July 2018 after which the Multiplex Association of India (MAI) filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court of India against the same.

    The matter was listed for hearing on 10 August 2018, before a bench comprising of justice R F Nariman and justice Indu Malhotra with senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi representing the MAI.

    MAI president Deepak Asher said “We are satisfied by the interim direction of the Supreme Court of India, staying the above order of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. We have always maintained that allowing patrons to bring in their own food and beverages inside cinema theatres, besides infringing upon the fundamental rights of multiplex and cinema operators to carry on business, and being violative of the contractual agreement between the patron and the cinema operator, has serious implications for safety and security, as well as health and hygiene. The stay granted by the Supreme Court reinforces the established business practice followed by cinemas across the world and also similar practices followed by other establishments and businesses like amusement parks, entertainment centres, sports stadia, restaurants, hotels, etc.”

    In addition, two other special leave petitions were filed before the Supreme Court of India by G S Malls Private Ltd and KC Theatre against the same order passed by the High Court, which were also heard along with the petition filed on behalf of MAI. Senior counsel Abhishek Singhvi represented G S Malls. A similar order has been passed in these two petitions as well.

  • SC to hear Star India petition on TRAI tariff order late August

    SC to hear Star India petition on TRAI tariff order late August

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today listed for 28 August the special leave petition filed by Star India and Vijay TV against a tariff and inter-connect orders of regulator TRAI that had been given a go-ahead by the Madras High Court.

    The TRAI tariff orders, first contested in Madras High Court by the petitioners, were cleared by the Chennai court with certain riders after hearings that continued almost over 16 months in front of two benches of the court.

    Though the petitioners were  unavailable for comments, a legal eagle explained that the very fact the Supreme Court has allotted a day for hearing the petition of Star India and Vijay TV, which basically revolves around copyright and why the regulator doesn’t have jurisdiction over such issues, highlights the fact that the judge doesn’t want to take a decision in a hurry.

    The next date of hearing of the case in the apex court on 28 August 2018 is few days before the deadline kicks in for filing of new inter-connect agreements by stakeholders of the Indian broadcast industry.

    After the Madras HC had given a thumb up to TRAI tariff order, and both the petitioners and the defendant (TRAI) had filed caveats in the Supreme Court, the regulator had bowled a googly saying that its tariff order would come into effect from 3 July 2018 as all judicial compliances had been completed. 

    “Having complied with the judicial mandates in the matter,  the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Eighth) (Addressable Systems) Tariff Order, 2017 and the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017 as upheld by the Hon'ble Madras High  Court and the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services Standards  of   Quality  of  Service and  Consumer  Protection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017 come into effect from 3rd July 2018,” the regulator had said in a statement pointing out that all timelines mentioned in the original order should be adhered to immediately.

    According to TRAI, implementation of the new regulatory framework will “bring in transparency”, enable provisioning of affordable broadcasting and cable TV services for the consumer and, at the same time, “would lead to an orderly growth of the sector”.

    Keep tuned in for another episode of this legal saga, which started to air sometime in 2016.

  • Star files caveat in Supreme Court on TRAI tariff order

    Star files caveat in Supreme Court on TRAI tariff order

    MUMBAI: So the slugfest on the pricing of digital television in India is entering the next round. And, it is Star India now that has approached the Supreme Court and filed a caveat with it on the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) tariff regulations and more specifically on the 15 per cent discount issue.

    According to sources, TRAI too had filed earlier a caveat at the apex court. A caveat is a notice given by a person or an organisation, informing the court that another person/company may file a suit or application against him/them and that the court must give the caveator – person/company filing the caveat – a fair hearing before deciding any matter brought before it in the relevant case.

    Last week, the third judge of the Madras High Court had upheld the regulator TRAI’s order on channel tariffs and dismissed the petitioners’ (Star India and Vijay TV) plea that pricing of content is not under the jurisdiction of the TRAI.

    Even as the high court upheld all the proposed regulations, it disallowed one that puts a cap of 15 per cent on the discount that can be offered by broadcasters or TV channels to distributors on the maximum retail price.

    Another observation of the high court relating to broadcast re-transmission rights or BRR too hasn’t gone down too well with the petitioners and that could be an issue too behind an appeal at the Supreme Court. Though, it is still not clear whether the petitioners or respondent would appeal the Chennai court order.

    Meanwhile a similar case is pending against the TRAI in the Delhi High Court. It involves Bharti Airtel Telemedia, Tata Sky and Discovery Communication India, which had filed petitions against the tariff order in 2017. The TRAI had then informed the court that the issues raised in the petitions were the subject matter of two writ petitions already filed in the Madras High Court and requested that it may await the outcome of those proceedings.

    The Delhi high court had accepted the request but had directed TRAI that it should inform it and the petitioners about the judgment before effectuating the orders. Additionally, earlier the Supreme Court too had ordered the maintenance of status quo as far as the pricing regulations were concerned.  

    The Madras HC has suspended its decision for two weeks to give time to parties involved to appeal to a higher court or seek further clarifications from it.

    Also Read:

    Madras HC gives split verdict in Star India versus TRAI case

    SC could take up TRAI-Star case on tariff regulations

    TRAI-Star case back to Madras HC with SC rider

  • 2G spectrum case: CBI acquits all accused

    2G spectrum case: CBI acquits all accused

    Mumbai: A special CBI court today acquitted all accused in the three cases related to the 2G spectrum allocation. The case pertained to graft and money laundering charges against a former telecom minister, politicians, and business executives in the grant of spectrum licences

    Deciding the fate of all accused, including former telecom minister A Raja and DMK leader Kanimozhi Karunanithi, the court opined, “Absolutely no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove any charge against any of the accused, made in its well choreographed charge sheet.”

    The CBI had claimed that Raja had devised his own way of granting telecom licences, brushed aside the first-come-first-served principle, misled the (then) Prime Minister, disregarded the concerns of other ministries and ran a parallel office at home to grant licences to whosoever offered him gratification.

    The case relates to alleged below-market-price sale of lucrative telecom permits bundled with airwaves in 2008, which a federal auditor said may have cost the government as much as $28 billion in lost revenue.

    In 2012, the Supreme Court ordered 122 licenses held by eight operators to be revoked, declaring the licenses illegal and the process “wholly arbitrary, capricious and contrary to public interest.”

    Also read:

    TRAI wants spectrum cap revised to 35 per cent

    Spectrum payment limit eased, NTP to facilitate data and security 

  • SC show cause to BCCI: Why Lodha panel recommendations not implemented

    SC show cause to BCCI: Why Lodha panel recommendations not implemented

    MUMBAI: The Supreme Court has issued a show-cause notice to BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Chaudhary to explain as to why its order on the Justice R M Lodha committee recommendations has not yet been implemented. 

    A three-judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra was told by the apex court-appointed Committee of Administrators (COA) that none of the Lodha panel recommendations or the court’s directions have been implemented. 

    Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, assisting the court as amicus curiae, said that three BCCI office-bearers — C K Khanna, Amitabh Chaudhary and Anirudh Chaudhary, were the persons responsible for implementing the recommendations and the court’s directions. The trio has been asked to personally appear in the court on 19 September.

    Taking into account the court’s order dated 2 January that ousted Anurag Thakur and Ajay Shirke from their board positions, the CoA requested the bench for the removal of Choudhary, Chaudhry and Khanna.

    In the absence of a working committee, the CoA noted, administrators and not the office-bearers were needed to be given the authority to manage the board’s affairs. 

    In a landmark judgment on 18 July, 2016, the apex court had approved majority of the recommendations put forth by the committee led by retired chief justice RM Lodha. The BCCI was given a deadline of six months to implement the accepted reforms.

    Also Read:

    IPL: Discovery & YuppTV in fray, CoA-BCCI discuss conflict of interest & pay today

    IPL: BCCI tells SC rights bidding process under way, hearing on 22 Aug

    IPL tendering process to commence 17 July; bidding to be fierce

  • Star India wins: SC disallows Prasar from retransmitting shared sports feed live

    Star India wins: SC disallows Prasar from retransmitting shared sports feed live

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said that shared feed of sporting events can only be carried on the terrestrial network of Doordarshan or DD FreeDish. 

    The judgement would help private broadcasters like Star India from possible losses in subscription and advertising revenues due to sharing of signals with Prasar Bharati which were eventually carried by private DTH and cable operators. Immediately after the judgment became known, DD and PB officials went into a huddle to study the ramifications. A DD official declined to comment.

    In a significant judgment, a division bench headed by Justice Ranjan Gogoi said that, though the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007, allows the feed of a sporting event of national importance to be shared mandatorily with Prasar Bharati, the public broadcaster cannot utilise it on a notified channel which has to be compulsorily carried by private distribution platforms. 

    While the judgement enables Prasar Bharati to expropriate the feed, the private sports channels will not be competing against Prasar Bharati on a commercial basis for the same content. 

    The judgment came on an appeal by the pubcaster against an order obtained by Star India from a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice B D Ahmed and Vibhu Bakhru.

    Also Read:

    Star Bharat to be available on DD FreeDish as b’caster’s fourth FTA offering

    Prasar may soon launch OTT, keep tabs on DD costs, exploit reach

  • IPL: BCCI tells SC rights bidding process under way, hearing on 22 Aug

    IPL: BCCI tells SC rights bidding process under way, hearing on 22 Aug

    MUMBAI: The Supreme Court sent a legal notice to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI)  enquiring why the IPL media rights auction has not taken place online. And, BCCI told the court that e-auction of rights was not possible and that the court should not intervene as the bidding process was already under way.

    The auction process for IPL media rights is in progress up to 28 August, and the rights would operate for a period of five years. BJP MP Subramanian Swamy had, on 11 July, filed a petition before the apex court asking why broadcast rights for cricket matches would not be sold through e-auction. He had mentioned that the BCCI should have gone for e-auction since a huge amount of Rs 300 billion was at stake.

    The court had directed the board to respond in two weeks.

    The bench, comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dipak Misra, has asked the Committee of Administrators (CoA), appointed by it, to assist the apex court in deciding the issue. The next hearing is now scheduled for 22 August.

    IPL’s TV broadcast rights were held by Sony Pictures Networks till the 10th edition which concluded in June. The Internet and mobile rights were awarded to Novi Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd (Hotstar), a unit of Star India, for a period of three years to 2017.

    Singapore-based World Sport Group pocketed the IPL broadcasting rights for 10 years in 2008 by investing US$ 918 million. A year later, the contract was replaced when Sony Group (through Multi Screen Media Pvt. Ltd) paid US$ 1.63 billion for the nine-year broadcasting rights. The auction process was delayed last year on the Supreme Court’s directive to first comply with the Lodha panel reforms.

    Facebook, Reliance Jio, Twitter, Sony Pictures Network India and Star India were some of the major companies who picked up the tender document. While the television broadcast rights for the Indian subcontinent is for 10 seasons (up to 2027), the digital rights are valid for five seasons and the international media rights also are for five seasons.

     

    Also Read: IPL: Media rights race hots up after IMG renews events deal

    Swamy seeks transparency in IPL media rights through SC

    IPL tendering process to commence 17 July; bidding to be fierce

  • Swamy seeks transparency in IPL media rights through SC

    Swamy seeks transparency in IPL media rights through SC

    NEW DELHI: The Indian Premier League, which saw a brief lull in controversy with Lalit Modi preferring to remain overseas, appears to be in for another storm, this time over broadcast rights.

    Bharatiya Janata Party member and Rajya Sabha MP Subramaniam Swamy has moved the Supreme Court seeking a transparent mechanism for auction of telecast rights of IPL cricket matches for the next five years. The auction is slated for 17 July 2017.

    Swamy told indiantelevision.com that his petition for e-auctioning of IPL media rights was expected to come up for hearing on Friday this week or Monday next week. He said that there is a requirement of non-discriminatory and transparent method, with the best international practices, to be adopted for distribution of the valuable media rights so as to ensure the maximum revenue in the larger national interest.

    The petition questioned the manner in which the rights worth Rs 250 billion to Rs 300 billion were being distributed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

    Seeking a stay of the present system, he said the huge investments make it mandatory to have the auction process robust, completely transparent in order to maximise the revenue and prevent vested interest from making undue gains.

    Swamy mentioned the matter before the bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar for early hearing of the matter as the BCCI next week.

    A lawyer himself, Swamy cited various orders of the apex court after finding irregularities committed by country’s apex cricket body. He said that as the BCCI was found having irregularities, illegalities, misappropriation and asymmetries in the functioning, the Supreme formed the Mudgal Committee as an investigator and then the Justice R M Lodha Committee was formed on 22 January 2015 by the Supreme Court.

    The Supreme Court on 30 January 2017 appointed a four-member committee of administrators headed by former Comptroller and Auditor General of India Vinod Rai to run the affairs of the BCCI and implement court-approved recommendations of the Lodha panel on reforms.

    Also Read :

    Vivo wins IPL title rights for Rs 21.9 bn

    IPL ’18 media rights decision likely in July, player recruitment norms to be tweaked

    Sports channels ratings dive in week 26

    IPL: Oppo, Vivo, Jio & Amazon ads ruled

  • Govt submits amended NSP in SC, Sun TV Red FM case adjourned

    MUMBAI: The apex court of India has adjourned Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy’s plea on national security that challenged Sun TV being allowed to participate in FM Radio auction.

    SC has asked  the central government to give Swamy the amended National Security Policy (NSP) in a week. Swamy had sought cancellation of Phase-3 licence granted to Sun TV’s Red FM India. A bench comprising chief justice of India JS Khehar and Justice DY Chandrachud directed the government counsel to provide Swamy the new NSP.

    Swamy had stated in the plea that ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) had, despite the opposition of home ministry, favoured Sun TV by allowing it to participate in FM Radio auction citing CBI and Enforcement Directorate cases against the main Sun TV promoter Kalanithi Maran in Aircel-Maxis case, Indian Legal Alive reported.

    Swamy has filed a petition seeking consistent and uniform policy on national security. It contented that national security should be bereft from arbitrariness. At the same time, he said it should not be contradictory in nature.

    On 7 July, additional solicitor-general Rana Mukherjee filed in the apex court in a sealed cover a revised policy on national security. Swamy submitted a letter written by union minister Arun Jaitley and former attorney-general of India to the government.

    The court read those letters and asked the government to provide Swamy a copy of the revised policy. The court will resume the hearing the case after a week.

    Questioning the maintainability of Swamy’s petition, the government counsel also said the NSP was framed in June 2015, and amended in December 2015, Live Law reported.

    According to the Constitution, Swamy argued, only the home ministry had the power to take a decision on national security and the MIB should not interfere. He alleged that the MIB’s decisions were arbitrary and the licence to any TV or radio should be cancelled on grounds of national security.

    Also Read :

    Delhi HC rules in favour of Sun TV chief Maran

    Saregama & Kumkum Bhagya prop Zee TV to third place across genres

    Amagi to provide ad solutions to Sun TV Network

  • SC terms ‘anti-competitve’ barring of TV channels airing dubbed serial

    MUMBAI: In Competition Commission of India versus Co-ordination Committee of Artists And Technicians of WB Film and television, the apex court of India has held that, preventing channels from airing the tele-serial Mahabharat dubbed in Bengali is an ‘anti-competitive’ activity, and the protection under the garb of language goes against the interest of competition.

    The CCI (Competition Commission of India), acting on a complaint that the Committee of Artists and Technicians of West Bengal Film, Eastern India Motion Picture Association (EIMPA) and Television Investors (Coordination Committee), demanded to halt the airing of the dubbed serial on some TV channels, held that this activity was ‘anti-competitive’. 

    The Competition Appellate Tribunal however set aside the order and conclusion of the CCI, stating that the EIMPA and the coordination committee were not an “enterprise.” The CCI then approached the Supreme Court.

    In its judgement, the SC observed: This appeal raises an interesting and important question of law touching upon the width and scope of jurisdiction of the Competition Commission of India (for short, the ‘CCI’) under Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002. Sajjan Kumar Khaitan is the proprietor of M/s. Hart Video having his establishment in Kolkata. He is in the business of distributing video cinematographic TV serials and telecasting regional serials in the States of Eastern India, which includes West Bengal.

    BRTV, Mumbai, which is the producer of  T.V.   programmes,  had  produced  T.V.  Serial   named ‘Mahabharat’, original version whereof was in Hindi.  BRTV entrusted the sole and exclusive rights of ‘Mahabharat’ to Magnum T.V. Serials to dub the Hindi version of the said serial in Bangla with further rights to exploit its Satellite, Pay TV, DTH, IPTV, Video, Cable TV and internet rights till Septembe, 2016.  Magnum TV, in turn, appointed Hart Video as the sub-assigner to dub the said serial ‘Mahabharat’ in Bangla language, which it did. Thereafter, for the purposes of telecasting the said dubbed serial, an agreement was executed for the time slot, on revenue sharing basis, with Bengal Media Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata, which is the owner of ‘Channel 10’, as well as with Calcutta Television Network Private Ltd., Kolkata, which is the owner of CTVN+ Channel. These two channels were given hard disks of four episodes of the serial on 2 February, 2011 and 12 February, 2011.An advertisement was placed in daily newspapers on 19 February, 2011, informing the public at large that the serial ‘Mahabharat’ would be telecast in Bangla on Channel 10 at 10.00 a.m. in the morning and on CTVN+ at 10.00 p.m. every Sunday.

    Certain producers in eastern India formed an association called Eastern India Motion Picture Association (for short, ‘EIMPA’).  Likewise, the artists and technicians of film and television industry in West Bengal have formed an association known as ‘Committee of Artists and Technicians of West Bengal Film and Television Investors (‘Coordination Committee’).

    Telecasting of serial ‘Mahabharat’ in Bangla after dubbing it in the said language from the original produced Hindi language was not palatable to EIMPA or the Coordination Committee.  In their perception, serials produced in other languages and shown on the T.V. Channels after dubbing them in Bangla would affect the producers of that origin and, in turn, would also adversely affect the artists and technicians working in West Bengal. The apprehension was that it may deter production of such serials in Bangla because of the entry of serials produced in other languages and shown to the public by dubbing the same in their language. 
    Because of this reason, on 18 February, 2011 CTVN+ received a letter from the Coordination Committee to stop the telecast of the dubbed serial ‘Mahabharat’.   Letter dated 1 March, 2011 to the similar effect was written by EIMPA to CTVN+. Identical demands were made to this Channel by the Coordination Committee as well.

    It was alleged that for the last 13 years there was a convention and practice adopted in the said region not to dub any programme from other languages in Bangla and telecast them in West Bengal. A threat was also extended to CTVN+ as well as Channel 10 that in case the telecast   is  not  stopped,  their  channels  would  face non-cooperation from these two bodies, i.e., EIMPA and the Coordination Committee.

    The CCI, after receiving the aforesaid information from Sajjan Khaitan (Hart Video), formed a prima facie opinion that acts on the part of EIMPA and Coordination Committee were anti-competitive. Accordingly, matter was assigned to the Director General (DG) for detailed investigation who found Hart Video information to be factually correct.

    Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 reads as under :

    Anti-competitive agreements: 

    No enterprise or association of enterprises or person or association of persons shall enter into any  agreement in respect of production, supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods or provision of services, which causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India.

    Any agreement entered into in contravention of the provisions contained in subsection (1) shall be void.

    Any agreement entered into between enterprises or associations of enterprises or persons or associations of persons or between any person and enterprise or practice carried on, or decision taken by, any association of enterprises or association of persons, including cartels, engaged in identical or similar trade of goods or provision of services, which—
    (a)   directly or indirectly determines purchase or sale prices;
    (b)  limits or controls production, supply, markets, technical development, investment or provision of services;
    (c)   shares the market or source of production or provision of services by way of allocation of geographical area of market, or type of goods or
       services, or number of customers in the market or  any other similar way;
    (d)   directly or indirectly results in bid rigging or collusive bidding, shall be presumed to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition:

    The CCI thus rightly observed that the protection in the name of the language goes against the interest of the competition, depriving the consumers of exercising their choice. Acts of Coordination Committee definitely caused harm to consumers by depriving them from watching the dubbed serial on TV channel; albeit for a brief period. It also hindered competition in the market by barring dubbed TV serials from exhibition on TV channels in the State of West Bengal. It amounted to creating barriers to the entry of new content in the said dubbed TV serial. Such act and conduct also limited the supply of serial dubbed in Bangla, which amounts to violation of the provision of Section 3(3)(b) of the Act. Resultantly, the instant appeal of CCI stands allowed.

    Click Here