ITV

Tag: Arjun Natarajan

  • Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

    Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

    NEW DELHI: Canara Star Communications Pvt. Ltd Karnataka, which has a long-pending dispute with Star India with regard to payments, has been given one more opportunity by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to reply to an affidavit of 23 March 2016 by the broadcaster alleging there was no entity of the name of the MSO on the website of the Corporate Affairs Ministry.

    Canara Star was given one more week from 20 December 2016 to file its affidavit, and Star India was permitted to respond to the affidavit if it so desired.

    Members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava put up the matter for further hearing on 20 January 2017.

    The Tribunal said: “It is seen that the affidavit which has been filed by Canara Star is not prima facie in conformity with the directions given by the Tribunal on 18 December 2015.

    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 was 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.

    As 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 could intervene, 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 Bangalore also.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    Earlier this year, Canara Star had been asked by the TDSAT to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their dispute.

    However, then chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members — Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee. Earlier, on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by Counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

    In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January.

    In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of around Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    Also read:

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

  • Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

    Clarify status with Star India, TDSAT asks Canara Star

    NEW DELHI: Canara Star Communications Pvt. Ltd Karnataka, which has a long-pending dispute with Star India with regard to payments, has been given one more opportunity by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to reply to an affidavit of 23 March 2016 by the broadcaster alleging there was no entity of the name of the MSO on the website of the Corporate Affairs Ministry.

    Canara Star was given one more week from 20 December 2016 to file its affidavit, and Star India was permitted to respond to the affidavit if it so desired.

    Members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava put up the matter for further hearing on 20 January 2017.

    The Tribunal said: “It is seen that the affidavit which has been filed by Canara Star is not prima facie in conformity with the directions given by the Tribunal on 18 December 2015.

    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 was 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.

    As 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 could intervene, 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 Bangalore also.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    Earlier this year, Canara Star had been asked by the TDSAT to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their dispute.

    However, then chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members — Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee. Earlier, on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by Counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

    In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January.

    In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of around Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    Also read:

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

  • 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.
     

     

  • TDSAT asks Canara Stars for guarantee with regard to arrears to Star India

    TDSAT asks Canara Stars for guarantee with regard to arrears to Star India

    New Delhi: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has said it may take appropriate action if Canara Star fails to furnish the required guarantee as sought by Star India in their long-pending dispute.

    Meanwhile, Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member Kuldip Singh listed the matter for 9 March. The Tribunal took note of the fact that Canara Star had given a payment schedule to Star India which was represented by Counsel Arjun Natarajan. Earlier last month, the Tribunal had given time in two different hearings to Canara Star to furnish the guarantee.   

    In the hearing in the  third week of December last year, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of about Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    The directive had come after being informed by Canara Star counsel Tushar Singh that the parties had failed to resolve the dispute, though Star India counsel Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan had told the Tribunal that no attempts had been made by Canara Star to resolve the dispute.

    The Tribunal had also asked Canara to produce its bank statements and materials to show payments made by it towards invoices raised by Star India based on Canara’s SMS reports.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold off its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    The other two petitions are by Canara Star challenging disconnection notices issues by Star India for analogue areas of Kumta and Bhatkal.

  • TDSAT asks Canara Stars for guarantee with regard to arrears to Star India

    TDSAT asks Canara Stars for guarantee with regard to arrears to Star India

    New Delhi: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has said it may take appropriate action if Canara Star fails to furnish the required guarantee as sought by Star India in their long-pending dispute.

    Meanwhile, Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and member Kuldip Singh listed the matter for 9 March. The Tribunal took note of the fact that Canara Star had given a payment schedule to Star India which was represented by Counsel Arjun Natarajan. Earlier last month, the Tribunal had given time in two different hearings to Canara Star to furnish the guarantee.   

    In the hearing in the  third week of December last year, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of about Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in DAS area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    The directive had come after being informed by Canara Star counsel Tushar Singh that the parties had failed to resolve the dispute, though Star India counsel Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan had told the Tribunal that no attempts had been made by Canara Star to resolve the dispute.

    The Tribunal had also asked Canara to produce its bank statements and materials to show payments made by it towards invoices raised by Star India based on Canara’s SMS reports.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold off its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    The other two petitions are by Canara Star challenging disconnection notices issues by Star India for analogue areas of Kumta and Bhatkal.

  • TDSAT asks Canara Star for payment plan to clear Star India’s arrears

    TDSAT asks Canara Star for payment plan to clear Star India’s arrears

    NEW DELHI: Canara Star has been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their long-pending dispute.

    However, TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee.

    Earlier on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

    In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January. 

    In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of about Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in the Digital Addressable System (DAS) area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    The directive had come after being informed by Canara Star counsel that the parties had failed to resolve the dispute, though Star India counsels Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan had told the Tribunal that no attempts had been made by Canara Star to resolve the dispute.

    The Tribunal had also asked Canara to produce its bank statements and materials to show payments made by it towards invoices raised by Star India based on Canara’s SMS reports.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold off its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    The other two petitions are by Canara Star challenging disconnection notices issues by Star India for analogue areas of Kumta and Bhatkal.

  • TDSAT asks Canara Star for payment plan to clear Star India’s arrears

    TDSAT asks Canara Star for payment plan to clear Star India’s arrears

    NEW DELHI: Canara Star has been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to present a payment schedule to Star India to settle their long-pending dispute.

    However, TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava accepted the plea by Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan that this schedule should not come in the way of its requirement to furnish a guarantee.

    Earlier on 4 February, the Bench had granted a week’s time to Canara Star represented by counsel Tushar Singh, to furnish a guarantee.

    In terms of the earlier order of 14 January, the directors of Canara Star were present in person before TDSAT on 29 January. 

    In the hearing in third week of December, the Tribunal had asked Canara Star to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of about Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in the Digital Addressable System (DAS) area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

    The directive had come after being informed by Canara Star counsel that the parties had failed to resolve the dispute, though Star India counsels Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan had told the Tribunal that no attempts had been made by Canara Star to resolve the dispute.

    The Tribunal had also asked Canara to produce its bank statements and materials to show payments made by it towards invoices raised by Star India based on Canara’s SMS reports.

    Canara, which has allegedly sold off its business to another MSO called All Digital, was to produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

    The other two petitions are by Canara Star challenging disconnection notices issues by Star India for analogue areas of Kumta and Bhatkal.

  • TDSAT directs Canara Star to settle disputes with Star India

    TDSAT directs Canara Star to settle disputes with Star India

    NEW DELHI: Bangalore’s Canara Star has been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to intimate Star India whether it admits the SMS reports submitted by the broadcaster for the period 2014 to January 2015.

     

    The common order by the Tribunal on three petitions including one by Star India against Canara Star claiming recovery dues of about Rs 3 crore pertaining to the MSO’s operations in Digital Addressable System (DAS) area of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

     

    Listing the matter for 14 January, 2016 the Tribunal also asked Canara to produce its bank statements and materials to show payments made by it towards invoices raised by Star India based on Canara’s SMS reports.

     

    Canara, which has allegedly sold off its business to another MSO called All Digital, will produce its deed of transfer of establishment to All Digital, which was made a party in the petition filed by Star India.

     

    The other two petitions are by Canara Star challenging disconnection notices issues by Star India for analogue areas of Kumta and Bhatkal.

     

    Star India counsels Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan produced the SMS reports on the basis of which it had billed Canara Star.

     

    Star India argued that Canara cannot withhold payments to it for invoices, which were raised by the broadcaster on the basis of Canara Star’s SMS reports.

     

    Canara Star’s counsel Jayant Mehta asked for one final opportunity to settle the disputes.

     

    All the three matters had been before the mediator from early August till mid November but no settlement could be arrived at.

  • TDSAT asks Durgapur MSO to permit head-end inspection by Star India

    TDSAT asks Durgapur MSO to permit head-end inspection by Star India

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) directed the multi-system operator (MSO) Akash Tori Infocom Services to allow Star India to examine its headends in Durgapur on 18 and 19 November.

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava listed the matter for 27 November.

     

    The order was given after the Tribunal was informed by Akash Tori counsel Radhika Gupta that the MSO had not yet received some set top boxes (STBs) it had ordered.

     

    When the matter had first come up on 19 October, the Tribunal had noted that Akash Tori was a ‘fledgling multi-system operator’ and ‘Star India cannot have any objection to give its signals on RIO terms to it,’ permitting Star to examine the headend of the MSO.

     

    However, Star India counsel Arjun Natarajan told the Tribunal today that the MSO had not given a convenient date as instructed by the Tribunal and it was only when the broadcaster wrote to the MSO that it had referred to the STBs, which were yet to arrive.

     

    Thereupon, Justice Alam queried as to why an MSO should file a petition for signals when it was not ready to receive them. The MSO had filed a petition seeking Star’s signals in digital mode on RIO terms.