ITV

Tag: Bombay High Court

  • Bombay HC rejects NDTV’s petition against SEBI’s show-cause notice

    Bombay HC rejects NDTV’s petition against SEBI’s show-cause notice

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed the writ petition filed by New Delhi Television’s (NDTV) promoter Dr. Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy against Security and Exchange Board of India’s (SEBI) show-cause notice.

    SEBI had issued a show-cause notice to NDTV’s promoters for alleged violation of insider trading regulations on 31 August 2018, the promoters had challenged the same in the high court in December.

    Refusing to intervene in the matter, a division bench of Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice RI Chagla “asked promoters to contest the adjudicatory proceedings before SEBI”.

    SEBI had issued the notice alleging the petitioner had committed violation of insider trading almost a decade ago while being in possession of ‘unpublished price sensitive information’.

    The promoters had challenged the SEBI’s notice in the HC on the premises that the capital market regulator failed to offer any evidence or documentation to substantiate the allegations. The petition also read that the notice was ‘arbitrary, unreasonable and issued in gross abuse of power’.

    The matter NDTV promoter against SEBI came to the high court on 2 January 2020. The court also observed that SEBI’s notice is time-barred; we don’t wish to interfere with it.

  • Telecast of Amul’s misleading frozen dessert ad suspended

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has directed popular FMCG brand Amul to suspend the telecast of the television commercial that showed frozen desserts in a negative light. The court has found the advertisement to be disparaging to HUL’s Kwality Walls brand having a market share of around 51 per cent.

    Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has submitted that the said commercial, along with its transcripts, depicted a child being discouraged from eating frozen dessert on the grounds that it contained vanaspati oil (which is adverse to health). Kwality, in its plaint, however, averred that its frozen desserts do not contain vanaspati, and are made using vegetable fat.

    In March 2017, HUL had filed a suit before the Bombay High Court claiming that the Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation, which takes care of Amul’s marketing was spreading malicious information about its Kwality products. The court yesterday held that the ad showing the difference between frozen desserts and ice-cream amounted to slander.

    The court, in its order, stated that Amul has been restrained from broadcasting, telecasting or otherwise howsoever communicating to the public or publishing two television commercials or any part or any other advertisement of a similar nature, denigrating or disparaging Kwality products, including frozen desserts.

    HUL has also charged that the Amul TVC designed to mislead the public into believing that an entire class of products are frozen desserts, and are, therefore, unfit for consumption. According to HUL, a majority of Kwality products sold in India are classified as frozen desserts under the Food and Safety Standards Act, 2006.

    While deciding the issue, Justice SJ Kathawalla delved into the difference between ice-cream and frozen desserts as per Regulation 2.1.7 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011. As per the Regulations, the distinguishing factor between the two is that ice creams must contain over 10% milk fat, whereas frozen desserts must contain over 10% total fat (i.e. milk fat and/or edible vegetable oil).

    The law also distinguishes between edible vegetable oil, which the plaintiffs use in their products and hydrogenated vegetable oil, commonly referred to as Vanaspati. After seeing the ad, the court held, “The Defendants have therefore made a false representation to the consumers and also indulged in a negative campaign that no frozen dessert is pure, and only Amul ice cream is pure, as all frozen desserts contain Vanaspati, and are therefore inferior.”

    The court also said that the disclaimer of the ad clarifying that “vanaspati” refers to “vegetable oil” was misleading. Moreover, the defendants had issued another ad replacing “vanaspati” with “vanaspati Tel” in the voiceover, which the court said made no difference whatsoever.

    The defendants claimed that their TVCs were part of a campaign to educate the consumers about the difference, and were not targeted at denigrating the plaintiff’s products. Justice Kathawalla said: “Any campaign to educate the members of the public by placing before them the true and correct facts/ingredients used in a product should always be welcomed. However, no manufacturer can place misleading information before the consumers qua the product of his rivals, and thereby disparage/discredit/belittle such product including influencing the consumer not to buy the same in the garb of educating and/or bringing the correct facts before the members of the public…”

  • Copyright infringement: Kross awarded injunction against ‘Pushpaka Vimana’, hearing on 12 Apr

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has issued an ad-interim injunction restraining further exhibition and distribution of the Kannada film, “Pushpaka Vimana” in any manner or in any medium including cinema theatres, television, CDs/DVDs. 

    Kross Pictures is a cross-border film and television production company with offices in Seoul, Los Angeles, and Mumbai. 

    The order restrains the film-makers from awarding any rights in relation to satellite or telecast rights of the film for its exhibition. The Court further directed defendants to disclose to the court the earnings from the film and all contracts with artists involved with the movie.

    The Bombay High Court stated that the Kannada film prima facie appears to be a copy of the Korean film called “Miracle In Cell No. 7” the rights to which are owned by Kross Pictures India. The original film was released on 23rd January 2013, first in Korean and then on Youtube in English in 2014. Kross Pictures had moved the Bombay High Court claiming copyright infringement against the producers of the Pushpaka Vimana. Dr. Birendra Saraf, instructed by Anirudh Rastogi of TRA and Ankita Singh of A&P Partners, appearing for Kross Pictures drew the court’s attention to at least fifteen instances where producer AR Vikhyat  of Vikhyat Chitra Productions has publicly admitted that he ‘adapted’ the screenplay of the Korean film for Pushpak Vimana.

    Kross acquires high-concept and proven intellectual property to produce localized films in different languages.  Kross’s Indian operation started in 2015, and has produced the 2016 Hindi film “TE3N” which is based on the Korean film “Montage”, and is currently producing “Suspect X” (directed by Sujoy Ghosh) for Amazon India.

    The court order can be seen here:

  • Viacom18 cracks down on counterfeit merchandise

    Viacom18 cracks down on counterfeit merchandise

    MUMBAI: In its bid to counter the growing menace of counterfeit merchandise, Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd. had undertaken an investigation that led to a raid in Mumbai’s market Abdul Rehman Street.

    Viacom18 Media is one of India's fastest growing entertainment networks and a house of iconic brands that offers multi-platform and multicultural brand experiences. A JV of Viacom Inc. and the Network18 Group, Viacom18 defines entertainment in India by touching the lives of people through its properties.

    Viacom raided two stores — Shubham Return Gifts and Eliperi Stationery, which were found to be selling counterfeit Dora the Explorer products.  

    The stores were raided by a team comprising court receivers of the Bombay High Court and representatives of Viacom18. The owners of the stores will be summoned to court to identify the source and locations of the manufacturers of these seized goods.

    "We see this as an essential step towards ensuring that our characters are not represented on inferior, unlicensed products – which may pose health and safety risks. We are extremely grateful for the cooperation of the judiciary and the police who have executed the appropriate legal action to protect our intellectual property and to prevent inferior, and potentially dangerous products from being sold to unsuspecting consumers. " said a spokesperson on behalf of Viacom18.

    Viacom18 owns iconic brands such as Colors, Roadies and Supersonic and characters such as Keymon Ache, Shiva, characters of Pakdam Pakdai and is also the exclusive licensee for iconic characters and brands such as Peppa Pig, Motu Patlu, Spongebob Square Pants, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Ninja Hattori, Peanuts and Shaun the Sheep amongst many more.

    Also Read :-

    Nick Jr to premiere 'Peppa Pig' show in India  

    'Motu Patlu- King of Kings' is Viacom18’s calculated risk

    Viacom18 to launch exclusive Jungle Book Merchandise in India

    BE Viacom18 gets John Abraham to promote Arunachal tourism

  • In deference to court, BARC to release suspended channels’ data

    In deference to court, BARC to release suspended channels’ data

    MUMBAI: Country’s TV audience ratings agency Broadcast Audience Research Council of India (BARC), in deference to Bombay High Court, has decided to renew audience measurement and release of data of all the three TV news channels it had suspended for four weeks on 24 November, 2016.

    However, BARC would continue to pursue the cases in the court.

    While one of the suspended channels, India News, had moved the court earlier managing to get interim relief, the case relating to V6 News was taken up by the court on Tuesday.

    BARC India CEO Partho Dasgupta stated, “BARC India respects ad-interim order of (the) court, and is following through on implementing the same with respect to its subscriber data with effect from this week. As the matter remains sub-judice, it would not be appropriate to say anything beyond this at the moment.”

    Though no official confirmation is available, but BARC India is expected to convey the same to all its subscribers on Wednesday assuring them that the ratings organisation would work towards further streamlining its on-ground processes so as to plug loopholes, if any, and work towards a transparent and more robust data eco-system.

    Towards the end of November, BARC India, in an unprecedented move, had informed its subscribers that it was suspending for four weeks the ratings of India News, TV9 Telegu and V6 News owing to suspected mala fide practices. Subsequently, all the three TV channels moved courts within a space of few days with India News leading the way.

    Speaking to Indiantelevision.com, Subir Kumar, who represented V6 News in the high court on 13 December, 2016, said that BARC India had partially argued the case on 9 December 2016 and had sought more time from the court. On the next hearing (13 December) BARC told the court that it was withdrawing the suspension of ratings review of V6 News. As a result of this development, BARC India would release data relating to V6 in the normal course for the fourth week (the last week in BARC’s purported suspension), the lawyer added.

    Pointing out that his client would appeal in the court seeking release of the ratings review of the previous three weeks by BARC as well, Kumar said that V6 News had also filed an injunction seeking damages of Rs 11 crore (Rs. 110 million) for allegedly “damaging the reputation and goodwill of V6 channel.”

    Reacting to the development, V6 News assistant editor Murali Krishna conveyed to Indiantelevision.com a message from V6 News chief editor and CEO Ravi Ankam. The message read: “We believe in highest values of journalism and grown with public support. We always said our ratings are consistent and fair. We approached the court of law for the truth to come out. We believe that BARC was misguided. We hope BARC will correct its system to protect the interests of popular channels like V6 News.”

    The Bombay HC on 6 December, 2016 had stayed the suspension of ratings review of India News even as BARC hinted at continuing its crusade. TV9, which too, reportedly, has subsequently got a favourable interim order from the court, could not be reached for an official reaction despite phone calls on Tuesday.

    ALSO READ:

    HC stays India News ratings suspension; BARC hints at continuing crusade

    V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    BARC India suspends three errant channels’ review

     

     

     

  • In deference to court, BARC to release suspended channels’ data

    In deference to court, BARC to release suspended channels’ data

    MUMBAI: Country’s TV audience ratings agency Broadcast Audience Research Council of India (BARC), in deference to Bombay High Court, has decided to renew audience measurement and release of data of all the three TV news channels it had suspended for four weeks on 24 November, 2016.

    However, BARC would continue to pursue the cases in the court.

    While one of the suspended channels, India News, had moved the court earlier managing to get interim relief, the case relating to V6 News was taken up by the court on Tuesday.

    BARC India CEO Partho Dasgupta stated, “BARC India respects ad-interim order of (the) court, and is following through on implementing the same with respect to its subscriber data with effect from this week. As the matter remains sub-judice, it would not be appropriate to say anything beyond this at the moment.”

    Though no official confirmation is available, but BARC India is expected to convey the same to all its subscribers on Wednesday assuring them that the ratings organisation would work towards further streamlining its on-ground processes so as to plug loopholes, if any, and work towards a transparent and more robust data eco-system.

    Towards the end of November, BARC India, in an unprecedented move, had informed its subscribers that it was suspending for four weeks the ratings of India News, TV9 Telegu and V6 News owing to suspected mala fide practices. Subsequently, all the three TV channels moved courts within a space of few days with India News leading the way.

    Speaking to Indiantelevision.com, Subir Kumar, who represented V6 News in the high court on 13 December, 2016, said that BARC India had partially argued the case on 9 December 2016 and had sought more time from the court. On the next hearing (13 December) BARC told the court that it was withdrawing the suspension of ratings review of V6 News. As a result of this development, BARC India would release data relating to V6 in the normal course for the fourth week (the last week in BARC’s purported suspension), the lawyer added.

    Pointing out that his client would appeal in the court seeking release of the ratings review of the previous three weeks by BARC as well, Kumar said that V6 News had also filed an injunction seeking damages of Rs 11 crore (Rs. 110 million) for allegedly “damaging the reputation and goodwill of V6 channel.”

    Reacting to the development, V6 News assistant editor Murali Krishna conveyed to Indiantelevision.com a message from V6 News chief editor and CEO Ravi Ankam. The message read: “We believe in highest values of journalism and grown with public support. We always said our ratings are consistent and fair. We approached the court of law for the truth to come out. We believe that BARC was misguided. We hope BARC will correct its system to protect the interests of popular channels like V6 News.”

    The Bombay HC on 6 December, 2016 had stayed the suspension of ratings review of India News even as BARC hinted at continuing its crusade. TV9, which too, reportedly, has subsequently got a favourable interim order from the court, could not be reached for an official reaction despite phone calls on Tuesday.

    ALSO READ:

    HC stays India News ratings suspension; BARC hints at continuing crusade

    V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    BARC India suspends three errant channels’ review

     

     

     

  • V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    MUMBAI: V6 News, from the stable of the Telugu channel popular across Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, also wants to challenge Broadcast Audience Research Council India (BARC India) after the latter suspended its ratings review for some weeks along with other two channels on 24 November, 2016.

    BARC India, the only television audience measurement body in India, had temporarily suspended the review of viewership of three news channels. BARC communicated to all the broadcasters that ratings for India News, TV9 Telugu and V6 News were suspended owing to suspected mala fide practices.

    Media buying and planning (advertising) agencies and brands had reacted strongly or cautiously when it came to commenting on famous yet delinquent channels. Dentsu Aegis chairman Ashish Bhasin had lauded the BARC decision: “It is a bold step taken by BARC to name and shame the mischievous entities.” It sends out a warning message to the channels to behave, and will act as a deterrent for other possible mischief-mongers that could spoil the purity of the currency for a Rs 20000 crore annual TV advertising business in India, Bhasin said.

    However, the Bombay High Court on 6 December stayed the suspension of ratings review of India News even as BARC hinted at continuing its crusade. Describing the suspension of India News ratings as ‘arbitrary and illegal’, the court stated that the suspension and subsequent communication to all the subscribers has prima-facie been seen as a reputation-maligning action, a press release from India News stated. India News CEO Varun Kohli said, “India News is a credible news channel in the broadcasting business in the country and has grown consistently in the last four years both in the times of BARC ratings and TAM ratings, the predecessor of BARC.”

    Reacting to the judgement, BARC India CEO Partho Dasgupta said: “We will continue to act as per our board and government guidelines, with the objective of providing the Indian broadcast industry with an accurate, robust and reliable television audience measurement system.”

    Players in the news eco-system meantime saw an overall decline in the ratings, according to BARC week 48. Since the court stay, observers have been wondering whether other two erring and suspended yet holier-than-thou channels would also knock at the doors of the courts of law seeking redressal.

    “We have filed a suit against the suspension of V6 review by BARC India,” V6 CEO Ravi Ankam communicated to Indiantelevision.com through the chief technical officer Kishore Kumar late yesterday evening. However, Ankam did not reveal the details, saying the “matter was sub-judice.”

    When contacted for its comment on V6 News decision, BARC India was prompt in its curt reply. “We will place the facts in (the) court. At this stage, as the matters are sub-judice, it would not be appropriate for us to say anything more. We are confident of what we are doing,” the ratings body CEO said.

    TV9 Telugu shied from reacting or commenting on BARC India action or the court stay. TV9 head of marketing Clifford Pereira passed on the responsibility of speaking to the media to the chief financial officer KVN Murthy. When Indiantelevision.com contacted CFO Murthy, he sought time as he was driving out of town for a private meeting, and then chose not to respond to calls or text messages.

    Also Read

    HC stays India News ratings suspension; BARC hints at continuing crusade

    ‘Name and shame delinquent channels’

  • V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    V6 challenges suspension; BARC to place facts before court

    MUMBAI: V6 News, from the stable of the Telugu channel popular across Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, also wants to challenge Broadcast Audience Research Council India (BARC India) after the latter suspended its ratings review for some weeks along with other two channels on 24 November, 2016.

    BARC India, the only television audience measurement body in India, had temporarily suspended the review of viewership of three news channels. BARC communicated to all the broadcasters that ratings for India News, TV9 Telugu and V6 News were suspended owing to suspected mala fide practices.

    Media buying and planning (advertising) agencies and brands had reacted strongly or cautiously when it came to commenting on famous yet delinquent channels. Dentsu Aegis chairman Ashish Bhasin had lauded the BARC decision: “It is a bold step taken by BARC to name and shame the mischievous entities.” It sends out a warning message to the channels to behave, and will act as a deterrent for other possible mischief-mongers that could spoil the purity of the currency for a Rs 20000 crore annual TV advertising business in India, Bhasin said.

    However, the Bombay High Court on 6 December stayed the suspension of ratings review of India News even as BARC hinted at continuing its crusade. Describing the suspension of India News ratings as ‘arbitrary and illegal’, the court stated that the suspension and subsequent communication to all the subscribers has prima-facie been seen as a reputation-maligning action, a press release from India News stated. India News CEO Varun Kohli said, “India News is a credible news channel in the broadcasting business in the country and has grown consistently in the last four years both in the times of BARC ratings and TAM ratings, the predecessor of BARC.”

    Reacting to the judgement, BARC India CEO Partho Dasgupta said: “We will continue to act as per our board and government guidelines, with the objective of providing the Indian broadcast industry with an accurate, robust and reliable television audience measurement system.”

    Players in the news eco-system meantime saw an overall decline in the ratings, according to BARC week 48. Since the court stay, observers have been wondering whether other two erring and suspended yet holier-than-thou channels would also knock at the doors of the courts of law seeking redressal.

    “We have filed a suit against the suspension of V6 review by BARC India,” V6 CEO Ravi Ankam communicated to Indiantelevision.com through the chief technical officer Kishore Kumar late yesterday evening. However, Ankam did not reveal the details, saying the “matter was sub-judice.”

    When contacted for its comment on V6 News decision, BARC India was prompt in its curt reply. “We will place the facts in (the) court. At this stage, as the matters are sub-judice, it would not be appropriate for us to say anything more. We are confident of what we are doing,” the ratings body CEO said.

    TV9 Telugu shied from reacting or commenting on BARC India action or the court stay. TV9 head of marketing Clifford Pereira passed on the responsibility of speaking to the media to the chief financial officer KVN Murthy. When Indiantelevision.com contacted CFO Murthy, he sought time as he was driving out of town for a private meeting, and then chose not to respond to calls or text messages.

    Also Read

    HC stays India News ratings suspension; BARC hints at continuing crusade

    ‘Name and shame delinquent channels’

  • Telecast ban withheld in two of 31 cases; no IMC recast plan

    Telecast ban withheld in two of 31 cases; no IMC recast plan

    NEW DELHI: Information and broadcasting minister M Venkaiah Naidu has said that there have been only two cases in the past two years and the current year where the government has put on hold its orders asking TV channels to prohibit transmission for limited time.

    These relate to channel DY 365 for a news broadcast on 12 June 2014 and the NDTV India for a report on 4 January 2016, Naidu told the Parliament. In both cases, he said, the channels had made representations to the ministry which were under consideration.

    The minister of state for information and broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore, answering a supplementary, said that there was no proposal to re-constitute the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) which already includes representatives from the industry.

    DY 365 TV channel telecast news bulletin revealing identity of rape victims in two separate news reports. The matter was placed before the IMC on 13 January 2015 in which a representative of the channel was also afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. IMC recommended that the channel may be taken off air for a day due to multiple violations. With the approval of competent authority, an order dated 26 March 2015 was issued to DY 365. Subsequently, the channel submitted a representation on 27 March.

    NDTV India TV channel telecast a report on Pathankot terrorist attack disclosing sensitive information well beyond the briefing given by the designated officer while the anti-terrorist operations were still under way. The content was found in violation of Rule 6(1)(p) of the Programme Code. The matter was placed before the IMC on 25 July, 2016, in which representative of the channel was also afforded an opportunity of a personal hearing. It was recommended that the channel may be taken off air for at least one day keeping in view the gravity of the violation and an order issued on 2 November 2016. Subsequently, the channel submitted a representation dated 7 November 2016 which is pending.

    (Meanwhile, the Bombay High Court has admitted for hearing a petition by Care World India challenging a week-long telecast prohibition order.)

    In reply to another question, Rathore said as many as 31 TV channels had been ordered to stop transmission for periods ranging from one to 60 days since 2005. These include Care World India and AXN two times each, News Time Assam for three news items.

    The authority for exercising powers under Cable Act by Central Government or concerned Government/ authorised officers are provided under various sections of the Cable Act and mainly under Section 19 & 20.

  • Telecast ban withheld in two of 31 cases; no IMC recast plan

    Telecast ban withheld in two of 31 cases; no IMC recast plan

    NEW DELHI: Information and broadcasting minister M Venkaiah Naidu has said that there have been only two cases in the past two years and the current year where the government has put on hold its orders asking TV channels to prohibit transmission for limited time.

    These relate to channel DY 365 for a news broadcast on 12 June 2014 and the NDTV India for a report on 4 January 2016, Naidu told the Parliament. In both cases, he said, the channels had made representations to the ministry which were under consideration.

    The minister of state for information and broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore, answering a supplementary, said that there was no proposal to re-constitute the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) which already includes representatives from the industry.

    DY 365 TV channel telecast news bulletin revealing identity of rape victims in two separate news reports. The matter was placed before the IMC on 13 January 2015 in which a representative of the channel was also afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. IMC recommended that the channel may be taken off air for a day due to multiple violations. With the approval of competent authority, an order dated 26 March 2015 was issued to DY 365. Subsequently, the channel submitted a representation on 27 March.

    NDTV India TV channel telecast a report on Pathankot terrorist attack disclosing sensitive information well beyond the briefing given by the designated officer while the anti-terrorist operations were still under way. The content was found in violation of Rule 6(1)(p) of the Programme Code. The matter was placed before the IMC on 25 July, 2016, in which representative of the channel was also afforded an opportunity of a personal hearing. It was recommended that the channel may be taken off air for at least one day keeping in view the gravity of the violation and an order issued on 2 November 2016. Subsequently, the channel submitted a representation dated 7 November 2016 which is pending.

    (Meanwhile, the Bombay High Court has admitted for hearing a petition by Care World India challenging a week-long telecast prohibition order.)

    In reply to another question, Rathore said as many as 31 TV channels had been ordered to stop transmission for periods ranging from one to 60 days since 2005. These include Care World India and AXN two times each, News Time Assam for three news items.

    The authority for exercising powers under Cable Act by Central Government or concerned Government/ authorised officers are provided under various sections of the Cable Act and mainly under Section 19 & 20.