Tag: adjourns

  • Tata Sky vs TRAI: Delhi High Court adjourns matter to 28 January

    Tata Sky vs TRAI: Delhi High Court adjourns matter to 28 January

    MUMBAI: The next instalment of DTH major Tata Sky’s ongoing legal tussle with the TRAI and its new tariff regime, in which Bharti Telemedia-owned Airtel Digital TV and Sun Direct are a part, will play out on 28 January. The Delhi High Court, on Wednesday, adjourned the matter as the judge was on leave.

    On 15 January, the matter was argued partly by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal on behalf of the direct-to-home operator on Tuesday who focussed on two points of 15 per cent discount cover (or the lack of it) and micromanagement attempt by TRAI of how business should be conducted.

    The hearing in the case started at around 2:45 pm and continued till almost 90 minutes during which Sibal argued that with the Madras HC setting aside the 15 per cent discount cap, the main aim of the tariff order had been frustrated and that attempt to micromanage a business, especially moves relating to pricing, etc., some of the provisions of the regulation were not in the interest of the DTH operator, which follows a different cost model compared to MSOs.

    The TRAI counsel’s interjection, according to industry sources, was minimal except seeking some technical clarifications relating to issues being argued by the Tata Sky lawyer and the actual content of the writ petition.

    Though this essentially means the regulator is unlikely to take any coercive action against the DTH operator and Discovery (that has already published new rates in compliance with the TRAI tariff order) until the next hearing, during the 10 January 2019 hearing of the case the court had verbally observed that Tata Sky could remain non-compliant at its own peril.

    At the earlier hearing, Sibal had impressed upon the judges to ask TRAI to produce all documents on how it arrived at the decision to implement the new tariff regime. He had also stated that implementing the present order will have an adverse impact on business.

    The TRAI lawyer had countered saying while Tata Sky felt aggrieved, a big DTH operator like Dish TV and all other MSOs seemed satisfied and had complied with the new tariff framework.

    The court had then asked the regulator to file the documents and the data that was the basis for arriving at the new tariff regime.

    Tata Sky is unlikely to upload its RIO for now, unlike Discovery, which has already published the same on its website, under protest.

    In 2017, Bharti Telemedia, Tata Sky and Discovery Communication India had filed petitions against TRAI, challenging its tariff order and the interconnect regulations.

    Unlike the position adopted by Star India wherein it questioned the regulatory powers of TRAI, the matter in the Delhi HC questions the regulator’s power to wipe out deals that operators enter into to fix commissions and rates for customers.

    While the Delhi HC case outcome could have implications on Tata Sky, Sun Direct, other distribution platform operators (DPOs) continue to be bound by the tariff order and most of them have complied to.

  • Delhi HC adjourns ad cap case to September due to lawyers’ strike

    Delhi HC adjourns ad cap case to September due to lawyers’ strike

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has adjourned the petition by the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and others challenging the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour to 8 September.

     

    The petition challenging the order of the Information and Broadcasting Ministry was put off in view of the strike by lawyers protesting the raising of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court from Rs 20 lakh to Rs 2 crore.

     

    The order that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) will not take any action against any channel pending the petition will continue. In an earlier hearing, the Court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

     

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels.

     

    Apart from the NBA, the petition have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

     

    The news and regional broadcasters fear that the capping of commercial airtime will curtail their ad revenues. They also argue that the ad cap must be brought only after the benefits of cable TV digitisation start showing.

  • Pressure of work before HC leads to adjournment of ad cap hearing to 21 January

    Pressure of work before HC leads to adjournment of ad cap hearing to 21 January

    NEW DELHI: The ad cap case has been adjourned yet again – this time to 21 January – in view of a large number of pending cases before the High Court.

     
    During the last hearing on 25 September, News Broadcasters Association counsel Nisha Bhambani had sought adjournment in view of the senior counsel S Ganesh not being in Delhi.

     
    Earlier on 15 July, the Court had adjourned the case as the final hearing of the bunch of petitions challenging the ad cap sort to be imposed by TRAI as the authority had not finalised its rejoinder.

     
    The case had been previously heard in the High Court on 17 December last year and 13 March this year.

     
    While TRAI had earlier given an assurance that it would not take any action against any channel pending the petition, the Court had at the regulator’s instance directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

     
    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels.

     
    Apart from the NBA, the petition have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

     
    The news and regional broadcasters fear that the capping of commercial airtime will curtail their ad revenues. They also argue that the ad cap must be brought only after the benefits of cable TV digitisation start kicking in.

     
    Earlier this year, the Court also granted interim relief to Hyderabad-based MAA Television Network against the ad cap regulation. However, the court had also observed that the cap on advertisements is a ‘reasonable exercise’.

     
    Four major broadcast networks—Star India, Zee Entertainment, Multi Screen Media and TV18 Group—are following the regulations.