Category: TDSAT

Final Hearing matters may be affected till Alam’s successor is found in TDSAT

NEW DELHI: Justice Aftab Alam, who has chaired the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal for the past three years, is laying down office in just under a week – but has made sure that work is not affected till a successor is appointed.

With the other member Kuldip Singh retired at the end of March, the tribunal now only has Justice Alam who retires on 16 June and member Bipin Behari Srivastava.

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act 2000 clearly stipulates that the Chairman has to be either a former or sitting Supreme Court judge or a sitting or retired Chief Justice of a High Court.

The selection of the chairman and a maximum of two members has to be made by the central government, and Department of Telecom sources have confirmed that the process has been initiated by the Communication and Information Technology ministry.

But perhaps keeping in view the time that may elapse before his successor is found, Justice Aftab Alam had on 26 May issued a notice re-constituting work allocation.

The chairperson said that with effect from 1 June, there will be two benches in TDSAT: the first will have the chairperson and one member, while Bench Two will have ‘Member/Members’.

He also made clear that Bench two will deal with matters listed for ‘preliminary hearing, directions, and for orders for passing interim orders only.’ This bench may also dispose of cases where a settlement is arrived at either bilaterally or through the Mediation Centre of the tribunal.

However, while TDSAT will not come to a standstill and will continue to hear new matters and also pass interim orders, this will affect those cases which have been listed for final arguments. These include cases such as the definition of adjusted gross revenue, the direct-to-home arrears case, and the matter relating to digital cable addressable tariffs for commercial establishments like hotels etc.

Justice Alam directed that this arrangement – issued by him under Section 14B (4)(b) and 14B(5) read with Section 14-1 of the TRAI Act – will continue until further orders.

June 10, 2016
Final Hearing matters may be affected till Alam’s successor is found in TDSAT

NEW DELHI: Justice Aftab Alam, who has chaired the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal for the past three years, is laying down office in just under a week – but has made sure that work is not affected till a successor is appointed.

With the other member Kuldip Singh retired at the end of March, the tribunal now only has Justice Alam who retires on 16 June and member Bipin Behari Srivastava.

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act 2000 clearly stipulates that the Chairman has to be either a former or sitting Supreme Court judge or a sitting or retired Chief Justice of a High Court.

The selection of the chairman and a maximum of two members has to be made by the central government, and Department of Telecom sources have confirmed that the process has been initiated by the Communication and Information Technology ministry.

But perhaps keeping in view the time that may elapse before his successor is found, Justice Aftab Alam had on 26 May issued a notice re-constituting work allocation.

The chairperson said that with effect from 1 June, there will be two benches in TDSAT: the first will have the chairperson and one member, while Bench Two will have ‘Member/Members’.

He also made clear that Bench two will deal with matters listed for ‘preliminary hearing, directions, and for orders for passing interim orders only.’ This bench may also dispose of cases where a settlement is arrived at either bilaterally or through the Mediation Centre of the tribunal.

However, while TDSAT will not come to a standstill and will continue to hear new matters and also pass interim orders, this will affect those cases which have been listed for final arguments. These include cases such as the definition of adjusted gross revenue, the direct-to-home arrears case, and the matter relating to digital cable addressable tariffs for commercial establishments like hotels etc.

Justice Alam directed that this arrangement – issued by him under Section 14B (4)(b) and 14B(5) read with Section 14-1 of the TRAI Act – will continue until further orders.

June 10, 2016
TDSAT directs Zeel to sign RIO based interconnect pacts with five MSOs

NEW DELHI: Five multi-system operators have been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to pay Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd (Zeel) a sum of Rs 3 crore to enable the signing of an RIO based interconnect agreement.

Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the agreement would be from 19 May, the date from which the petitioners are operating on that basis.

Listing the matter to come up on 16 August, the tribunal on 2 June made it clear that both the payment of Rs 3 crores and the direction for execution of the RIO based agreement is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and will abide by the final result of the petition.

The petitions were filed by Fastway Transmission Pvt Ltd, Jagsumi Perspectives Pvt Ltd, Novabase Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, and Radiant Digitek Network Pvt. Ltd against a general notice asking all the MSOs who on the date of issuance (11 May) of the fresh RIO by Zee Entertainment did not have a subsisting interconnect agreement with it to execute an agreement based on the RIO.

The petitioners were willing to execute an RIO based agreement until the validity and legality of the RIO coming under challenge in this petition and several other petitions on that issue is finally decided by the tribunal.

But the tribunal said the difficulty was that Zeel said the petitioners owe the sum of Rs 5.4 crores and odd and unless the dues are cleared, it is not inclined even to enter into the RIO based inter connect agreement. But the petitioners say the dues, if properly worked out, would come down to Rs 1,66,16,726, which the petitioners are agreeable to pay.

June 10, 2016
TDSAT directs Zeel to sign RIO based interconnect pacts with five MSOs

NEW DELHI: Five multi-system operators have been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to pay Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd (Zeel) a sum of Rs 3 crore to enable the signing of an RIO based interconnect agreement.

Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the agreement would be from 19 May, the date from which the petitioners are operating on that basis.

Listing the matter to come up on 16 August, the tribunal on 2 June made it clear that both the payment of Rs 3 crores and the direction for execution of the RIO based agreement is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and will abide by the final result of the petition.

The petitions were filed by Fastway Transmission Pvt Ltd, Jagsumi Perspectives Pvt Ltd, Novabase Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, and Radiant Digitek Network Pvt. Ltd against a general notice asking all the MSOs who on the date of issuance (11 May) of the fresh RIO by Zee Entertainment did not have a subsisting interconnect agreement with it to execute an agreement based on the RIO.

The petitioners were willing to execute an RIO based agreement until the validity and legality of the RIO coming under challenge in this petition and several other petitions on that issue is finally decided by the tribunal.

But the tribunal said the difficulty was that Zeel said the petitioners owe the sum of Rs 5.4 crores and odd and unless the dues are cleared, it is not inclined even to enter into the RIO based inter connect agreement. But the petitioners say the dues, if properly worked out, would come down to Rs 1,66,16,726, which the petitioners are agreeable to pay.

June 10, 2016
TDSAT to Taj TV: Restore signals to All Digital Network

NEW DELHI: Taj Television India Pvt. Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore the supply of signals to All Digital Network India Ltd with the MSO agreeing it will makes the aggregate payment of five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each payable by 30 June.

The supply of signals thus restored, shall continue provided further payments, if any, are made in terms of the schedule, according to the order by chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava who listed the case for 22 July. The tribunal also recalled its order restraining the petitioner and GTPL from making any withdrawals from their bank accounts.

Earlier, a payment schedule was submitted before the tribunal on behalf of GTPL which had accepted to pay off the dues of All Digital Network to Taj Television. Under that schedule, five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each were payable to Taj Television by 30 June with the fourth and fifth instalment falling due on that date.

But the tribunal was informed on 3 June that neither the GTPL nor All Digital had paid a single instalment under the schedule. Further, it was told that GTPL is also reported to have walked out of the arrangement with All Digital.

However, All Digital counsel Manikya Khanna told the tribunal that since GTPL was not complying with the commitment given on its behalf, All Digital accepted its liability to pay the dues of Taj TV and it will make payment in terms of the schedule earlier given on behalf of GTPL.

June 9, 2016
TDSAT to Taj TV: Restore signals to All Digital Network

NEW DELHI: Taj Television India Pvt. Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore the supply of signals to All Digital Network India Ltd with the MSO agreeing it will makes the aggregate payment of five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each payable by 30 June.

The supply of signals thus restored, shall continue provided further payments, if any, are made in terms of the schedule, according to the order by chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava who listed the case for 22 July. The tribunal also recalled its order restraining the petitioner and GTPL from making any withdrawals from their bank accounts.

Earlier, a payment schedule was submitted before the tribunal on behalf of GTPL which had accepted to pay off the dues of All Digital Network to Taj Television. Under that schedule, five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each were payable to Taj Television by 30 June with the fourth and fifth instalment falling due on that date.

But the tribunal was informed on 3 June that neither the GTPL nor All Digital had paid a single instalment under the schedule. Further, it was told that GTPL is also reported to have walked out of the arrangement with All Digital.

However, All Digital counsel Manikya Khanna told the tribunal that since GTPL was not complying with the commitment given on its behalf, All Digital accepted its liability to pay the dues of Taj TV and it will make payment in terms of the schedule earlier given on behalf of GTPL.

June 9, 2016
TDSAT recalls order asking Taj TV to continue signals to UCN Cable

NEW DEHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has recalled its order of 9 June last year asking Taj Television to continue its signals to UCN Cable Networks Pvt Ltd holding the “view that the petitioner no longer deserves any indulgence by the Tribunal.”

While passing its interim order last year, the Tribunal had said the multi-satellite operator should deposit a sum of Rs. 1.5 crore within a week and another sum of Rs. 1.5 crorewithin four weeks from the date of the first payment.

However, the Tribunal in its order on 3 June noted that Taj TV counsel Tejveer Singh Bhatia had now said that the outstanding dues against the MSO now stood at Rs 4.5 crores.

Noting that no one had appeared for the MSO, the Tribunal also observed the matter had been referred to the Mediation Centre where also “there was no regular appearance on behalf of the petitioner.”

The Tribnal listed the matter for 28 July but said “In case no one appears for the petitioner on the next date, the petition may be dismissed for non–prosecution without prejudice to any claim of the respondent.”

The petition by UCN Cable had been filed last year against the disconnection notices but according to the notices by Taj TV, the dues against UCN Cable for DAS and non-DAS areas amounted to Rs 4,40,36,870 as on 20 April 2015. In pursuance of the notices, the respondent had disconnected the supply of its signals to the petitioner on 27 May 2015.

UCN Cable had also been asked in June last year to pay to Taj TV monthly subscription fees according to the invoices raised by Taj TV and told that in case of default in payment of the installments and / or monthly subscription fees as per the invoices of Taj TV, it will be open to the broadcaster to disconnect the supply of its signals without any further orders from the Tribunal.

As per information provided on Taj Television’s website, the company distributes a suite of 49 leading television channels belonging to ZEEL, Zee Media Corporation Limited and Turner International India Private Limited.

June 8, 2016
TDSAT recalls order asking Taj TV to continue signals to UCN Cable

NEW DEHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has recalled its order of 9 June last year asking Taj Television to continue its signals to UCN Cable Networks Pvt Ltd holding the “view that the petitioner no longer deserves any indulgence by the Tribunal.”

While passing its interim order last year, the Tribunal had said the multi-satellite operator should deposit a sum of Rs. 1.5 crore within a week and another sum of Rs. 1.5 crorewithin four weeks from the date of the first payment.

However, the Tribunal in its order on 3 June noted that Taj TV counsel Tejveer Singh Bhatia had now said that the outstanding dues against the MSO now stood at Rs 4.5 crores.

Noting that no one had appeared for the MSO, the Tribunal also observed the matter had been referred to the Mediation Centre where also “there was no regular appearance on behalf of the petitioner.”

The Tribnal listed the matter for 28 July but said “In case no one appears for the petitioner on the next date, the petition may be dismissed for non–prosecution without prejudice to any claim of the respondent.”

The petition by UCN Cable had been filed last year against the disconnection notices but according to the notices by Taj TV, the dues against UCN Cable for DAS and non-DAS areas amounted to Rs 4,40,36,870 as on 20 April 2015. In pursuance of the notices, the respondent had disconnected the supply of its signals to the petitioner on 27 May 2015.

UCN Cable had also been asked in June last year to pay to Taj TV monthly subscription fees according to the invoices raised by Taj TV and told that in case of default in payment of the installments and / or monthly subscription fees as per the invoices of Taj TV, it will be open to the broadcaster to disconnect the supply of its signals without any further orders from the Tribunal.

As per information provided on Taj Television’s website, the company distributes a suite of 49 leading television channels belonging to ZEEL, Zee Media Corporation Limited and Turner International India Private Limited.

June 8, 2016
TDSAT: ZEEL not to disconnect signals to Star Broadband Service

NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has directed Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd not to give effect to the disconnection notice sent to Star Broadband Services (I) Pvt. Ltd and continue to supply its TV signals in terms of the earlier arrangements subsisting before the issuance of the notice.

Listing the matter for 9 August, Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava felt the validity of the RIO and whether or not it is fully in compliance with the directions of the Tribunal, requires serious consideration.

It said the expression “earlier subsisting arrangement” would include not only the previous interconnect agreement in writing between the two sides (though it might have expired before the publication of the RIO) but also any carriage agreement / placement agreement / discount agreement etc., in case the latter was co-terminus with the interconnect agreement.

In the next hearing, the Tribunal may hear the parties and make ‘a proper and equitable interim arrangement till a final decision is rendered on this petition’. However, the Tribunal said “It is made clear in case of any default in payment in terms of the subsisting arrangement, it will be open to the broadcaster to proceed in accordance with law.”

A reply has been filed on behalf of Zeel. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks, the Tribunal said.

Zeel counsel Tejveer Singh Bhatia had with him in a sealed cover the list of MSOs with whom his client entered into interconnect agreements during the period between the Tribunal’s decision of 7 December ( Noida Software Technology Park Ltd. Vs. M/s ZE Zeel. & Others) and the publication of its RIO on 11 May this year.

Zeel counsel Meet Malhotra, learned senior counsel appearing for Zee Entertainment submitted that the RIO had been framed and issued directly in pursuance of the Tribunal’s decision and it was being offered on a uniform basis and therefore, there is no reason for the petitioner or for anyone else, not to accept it.

June 3, 2016
TDSAT: ZEEL not to disconnect signals to Star Broadband Service

NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has directed Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd not to give effect to the disconnection notice sent to Star Broadband Services (I) Pvt. Ltd and continue to supply its TV signals in terms of the earlier arrangements subsisting before the issuance of the notice.

Listing the matter for 9 August, Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava felt the validity of the RIO and whether or not it is fully in compliance with the directions of the Tribunal, requires serious consideration.

It said the expression “earlier subsisting arrangement” would include not only the previous interconnect agreement in writing between the two sides (though it might have expired before the publication of the RIO) but also any carriage agreement / placement agreement / discount agreement etc., in case the latter was co-terminus with the interconnect agreement.

In the next hearing, the Tribunal may hear the parties and make ‘a proper and equitable interim arrangement till a final decision is rendered on this petition’. However, the Tribunal said “It is made clear in case of any default in payment in terms of the subsisting arrangement, it will be open to the broadcaster to proceed in accordance with law.”

A reply has been filed on behalf of Zeel. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks, the Tribunal said.

Zeel counsel Tejveer Singh Bhatia had with him in a sealed cover the list of MSOs with whom his client entered into interconnect agreements during the period between the Tribunal’s decision of 7 December ( Noida Software Technology Park Ltd. Vs. M/s ZE Zeel. & Others) and the publication of its RIO on 11 May this year.

Zeel counsel Meet Malhotra, learned senior counsel appearing for Zee Entertainment submitted that the RIO had been framed and issued directly in pursuance of the Tribunal’s decision and it was being offered on a uniform basis and therefore, there is no reason for the petitioner or for anyone else, not to accept it.

June 3, 2016