ITV

Category: TDSAT

  • TDSAT: IndiaCast to restore signals to Ortel against interim payment

    TDSAT: IndiaCast to restore signals to Ortel against interim payment

    NEW DELHI: IndiaCast Distribution Pvt Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore signals to Ortel Communications Ltd on receipt of a sum of Rs one crore as an interim measure. Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said that both parties should reconcile their accounts and Ortel will make the balance payment within two weeks thereof.

    The matter has been listed for further hearing on 30 May, while noting that Ortel counsel Navin Chawla did not seriously dispute the amounts due,but wanted the signals to be restored and was willing to sign a new interconnect agreement on IndiaCast’s RIO terms.

    Ortel had approached the tribunal against the disconnection notice. According to IndiaCast, Ortel had dues amounting to Rs 1.96 crore as on 31 March when the interconnect agreement came to an end and so the signal was disconnected on 28 March.

    IndiaCast counsel Ramji Srinivasan contended that Ortel had continued to disseminate the signals of his client even after 28 March and should be asked to pay for that as well. However, Chawla contested any allegation of unauthorized transmission.

    The tribunal said this issue could be raised during the reconciliation of accounts and if there was no agreement between the parties, they would have to abide by the order of the tribunal. On restoration of signals, IndiaCast was also free to hold an audit of the headends of Ortel.

    The tribunal also made it clear that after the restoration of signals, the subscription to be paid would be according to IndiaCast RIO terms expected by 1 May, subject to the final order of the tribunal. India Cast was free to disconnect in the event of failure to make payments as directed by the tribunal or non-cooperation during the reconciliation.

  • TDSAT: IndiaCast to restore signals to Ortel against interim payment

    TDSAT: IndiaCast to restore signals to Ortel against interim payment

    NEW DELHI: IndiaCast Distribution Pvt Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore signals to Ortel Communications Ltd on receipt of a sum of Rs one crore as an interim measure. Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said that both parties should reconcile their accounts and Ortel will make the balance payment within two weeks thereof.

    The matter has been listed for further hearing on 30 May, while noting that Ortel counsel Navin Chawla did not seriously dispute the amounts due,but wanted the signals to be restored and was willing to sign a new interconnect agreement on IndiaCast’s RIO terms.

    Ortel had approached the tribunal against the disconnection notice. According to IndiaCast, Ortel had dues amounting to Rs 1.96 crore as on 31 March when the interconnect agreement came to an end and so the signal was disconnected on 28 March.

    IndiaCast counsel Ramji Srinivasan contended that Ortel had continued to disseminate the signals of his client even after 28 March and should be asked to pay for that as well. However, Chawla contested any allegation of unauthorized transmission.

    The tribunal said this issue could be raised during the reconciliation of accounts and if there was no agreement between the parties, they would have to abide by the order of the tribunal. On restoration of signals, IndiaCast was also free to hold an audit of the headends of Ortel.

    The tribunal also made it clear that after the restoration of signals, the subscription to be paid would be according to IndiaCast RIO terms expected by 1 May, subject to the final order of the tribunal. India Cast was free to disconnect in the event of failure to make payments as directed by the tribunal or non-cooperation during the reconciliation.

  • TDSAT: Four broadcasters asked to work out commercial deals with MSO

    TDSAT: Four broadcasters asked to work out commercial deals with MSO

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal today asked four broadcasters to work out commercial terms with M.C. Transmissions towards working out fresh interconnect agreements.

    Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava gave the direction to the broadcasters – Multi Screen Media Pvt. Ltd, Star India, Taj Television, and Indiacast UTV Media Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd – after accepting the supplementary report of the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd about the headend of MC Transmissions. Tbe Tribunal listed the matter for further hearing on 26 April.  

    Earlier, the broadcasters had said that despite a BECIL report pointing out some defects, the MSO had not corrected them.  Thereupon, the Tribunal had asked the broadcasters to constitute a joint team or agree upon one of them getting the inspection done by its technical team to examine the headend of M.C. Transmissions for any defects.

    However, the broadcasters reported that they were still not satisfied with the headends, following which BECIL was asked to conduct a fresh examination. “In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no other course but to ask the BECIL to make a supplementary report specific to its earlier findings. Since the supplementary report is on a very limited and specific issue, BECIL, as a special case, will waive its fee”, the Tribunal had said, giving BECIL one week for a its report which was presented today.

  • TDSAT: Four broadcasters asked to work out commercial deals with MSO

    TDSAT: Four broadcasters asked to work out commercial deals with MSO

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal today asked four broadcasters to work out commercial terms with M.C. Transmissions towards working out fresh interconnect agreements.

    Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava gave the direction to the broadcasters – Multi Screen Media Pvt. Ltd, Star India, Taj Television, and Indiacast UTV Media Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd – after accepting the supplementary report of the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd about the headend of MC Transmissions. Tbe Tribunal listed the matter for further hearing on 26 April.  

    Earlier, the broadcasters had said that despite a BECIL report pointing out some defects, the MSO had not corrected them.  Thereupon, the Tribunal had asked the broadcasters to constitute a joint team or agree upon one of them getting the inspection done by its technical team to examine the headend of M.C. Transmissions for any defects.

    However, the broadcasters reported that they were still not satisfied with the headends, following which BECIL was asked to conduct a fresh examination. “In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no other course but to ask the BECIL to make a supplementary report specific to its earlier findings. Since the supplementary report is on a very limited and specific issue, BECIL, as a special case, will waive its fee”, the Tribunal had said, giving BECIL one week for a its report which was presented today.

  • 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. 

  • 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. 

  • 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.
     

     

  • 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.