ITV

Tag: Kuldip Singh

  • Siticable & Fastway resolve dispute; yet to sign interconnect agreement

    Siticable & Fastway resolve dispute; yet to sign interconnect agreement

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked Siticable Services Pvt Ltd not to re-transmit the signals of any broadcasters in the area of Panchkula unless a proper interconnect agreement with Fastway Transmission comes into existence.

     

    Earlier, TDSAT chairtman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava were told that both sides had arrived at an agreement.

     

    TDSAT disposed of the petition after it was told that all that remained was the formal execution of the interconnect agreement.

     

    The petition had been filed by Fastway against Siticable and Star India.

  • Siticable & Fastway resolve dispute; yet to sign interconnect agreement

    Siticable & Fastway resolve dispute; yet to sign interconnect agreement

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked Siticable Services Pvt Ltd not to re-transmit the signals of any broadcasters in the area of Panchkula unless a proper interconnect agreement with Fastway Transmission comes into existence.

     

    Earlier, TDSAT chairtman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava were told that both sides had arrived at an agreement.

     

    TDSAT disposed of the petition after it was told that all that remained was the formal execution of the interconnect agreement.

     

    The petition had been filed by Fastway against Siticable and Star India.

  • TDSAT asks Star India to audit Rudrapur Cable systems to enable ICA

    TDSAT asks Star India to audit Rudrapur Cable systems to enable ICA

    NEW DELHI: Star India has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to audit the systems of Rudrapur Cable TV Network to enable an interconnect agreement (ICA).

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava listed the matter for further hearing on 29 January by which time they said the audit must be over.

     

    Earlier, Rudrapur Counsel Vineet Bhagat, on the basis of instructions received by him, said his client wanted to execute an interconnect agreement with Star India on its RIO terms.

     

    However, Star India told the Tribunal that it wanted the system audited before entering into an agreement on that basis.

     

  • TDSAT asks Star India to audit Rudrapur Cable systems to enable ICA

    TDSAT asks Star India to audit Rudrapur Cable systems to enable ICA

    NEW DELHI: Star India has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to audit the systems of Rudrapur Cable TV Network to enable an interconnect agreement (ICA).

     

    TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava listed the matter for further hearing on 29 January by which time they said the audit must be over.

     

    Earlier, Rudrapur Counsel Vineet Bhagat, on the basis of instructions received by him, said his client wanted to execute an interconnect agreement with Star India on its RIO terms.

     

    However, Star India told the Tribunal that it wanted the system audited before entering into an agreement on that basis.

     

  • TDSAT directs BECIL to re-audit Digicable’s headend

    TDSAT directs BECIL to re-audit Digicable’s headend

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd (BECIL) to make a further audit of Digicable Network India’s system on whether there is a foolproof and tamper proof mechanism to truly and faithfully record the number of subscribers receiving the signals at Ahmedabad in case the feed of signals is taken from the Delhi headend to that city.

     

    The Tribunal, which had earlier asked BECIL to conduct an audit of Digicable Network and received its report, gave this direction on a petition by Digicable seeking transmission of digital addressable system signals of IndiaCast Distribution to Ahmedabad.

     

    Listing the matter for 29 January, TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava asked BECIL to submit the report within 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

     

    The Tribunal was not satisfied with the contentions of Digicable counsel Diggaj Pathak, who had relied upon the paragraph in the earlier BECIL petition making note of the unique package ID, which he said would sufficiently record the number of subscribers in Ahmedabad even though the feed may be taken from the Delhi headend.

     

    BECIL may also indicate the position in regard to the Gospel CAS, which finds mention in its earlier report, the Tribunal said.

     

    Pathak submitted that in case IndiaCast was not willing to execute an agreement on negotiated terms, it must still provide the signals of its channels to Digicable on its RIO terms in as much as the latter had expressed its willingness to execute the agreement based on the respondent’s RIO.

     

    IndiaCast objected to giving its signals to Digicable for retransmission in Gujarat on a number of grounds, one of which relate to the alleged lacuna in Digicable’s technical system.

     

    The Tribunal decided to presently leave aside other objections raised by IndiaCast (including non-payment of its dues) and only deal with the issue of the technical lacuna in the petitioner’s system. 

     

    The Tribunal noted that the earlier audit by BECIL was on a petition by Digicable last year against a notice of disconnection issued by IndiaCast, and the Tribunal had asked BECIL to examine Digicable headend. The report was given on 21 August. Even as the BECIL’s report was received before the Tribunal, it had been represented that the parties had resolved their disputes bilaterally and the petition filed by the Digicable was withdrawn.

     

    Digicable executed an interconnect agreement with IndiaCast on its behalf and on behalf of a number of its JV companies for retransmission of IndiaCast signals in different DAS areas in the country. The licence fee under this agreement is payable on CPS basis and does not cover Gujarat. 

     

    Pathak submitted that Digicable will take the feed of the signals from its headend located in Delhi to Ahmedabad for retransmission there. 

     

    IndiaCast counsel Kunal Tandon said the earlier report had shown that there is no proper bifurcation of subscribers or set-top-boxes (STBs) on the basis of locations of the petitioner’s CAS in Delhi. 

  • TDSAT directs BECIL to re-audit Digicable’s headend

    TDSAT directs BECIL to re-audit Digicable’s headend

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has asked the Broadcast Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd (BECIL) to make a further audit of Digicable Network India’s system on whether there is a foolproof and tamper proof mechanism to truly and faithfully record the number of subscribers receiving the signals at Ahmedabad in case the feed of signals is taken from the Delhi headend to that city.

     

    The Tribunal, which had earlier asked BECIL to conduct an audit of Digicable Network and received its report, gave this direction on a petition by Digicable seeking transmission of digital addressable system signals of IndiaCast Distribution to Ahmedabad.

     

    Listing the matter for 29 January, TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava asked BECIL to submit the report within 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

     

    The Tribunal was not satisfied with the contentions of Digicable counsel Diggaj Pathak, who had relied upon the paragraph in the earlier BECIL petition making note of the unique package ID, which he said would sufficiently record the number of subscribers in Ahmedabad even though the feed may be taken from the Delhi headend.

     

    BECIL may also indicate the position in regard to the Gospel CAS, which finds mention in its earlier report, the Tribunal said.

     

    Pathak submitted that in case IndiaCast was not willing to execute an agreement on negotiated terms, it must still provide the signals of its channels to Digicable on its RIO terms in as much as the latter had expressed its willingness to execute the agreement based on the respondent’s RIO.

     

    IndiaCast objected to giving its signals to Digicable for retransmission in Gujarat on a number of grounds, one of which relate to the alleged lacuna in Digicable’s technical system.

     

    The Tribunal decided to presently leave aside other objections raised by IndiaCast (including non-payment of its dues) and only deal with the issue of the technical lacuna in the petitioner’s system. 

     

    The Tribunal noted that the earlier audit by BECIL was on a petition by Digicable last year against a notice of disconnection issued by IndiaCast, and the Tribunal had asked BECIL to examine Digicable headend. The report was given on 21 August. Even as the BECIL’s report was received before the Tribunal, it had been represented that the parties had resolved their disputes bilaterally and the petition filed by the Digicable was withdrawn.

     

    Digicable executed an interconnect agreement with IndiaCast on its behalf and on behalf of a number of its JV companies for retransmission of IndiaCast signals in different DAS areas in the country. The licence fee under this agreement is payable on CPS basis and does not cover Gujarat. 

     

    Pathak submitted that Digicable will take the feed of the signals from its headend located in Delhi to Ahmedabad for retransmission there. 

     

    IndiaCast counsel Kunal Tandon said the earlier report had shown that there is no proper bifurcation of subscribers or set-top-boxes (STBs) on the basis of locations of the petitioner’s CAS in Delhi. 

  • TDSAT to hear Sun’s petition alleging Asianet’s changing placement of important channels

    TDSAT to hear Sun’s petition alleging Asianet’s changing placement of important channels

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) will hear a petition by Sun Distribution Services Pvt Ltd on27 January alleging that the placement of important channels has been changed by Asianet Satellite Communication.

     

    The petition was initially filed alleging that Asianet had discontinued the distribution of Sun’s signals on its network without any notice and in violation of the regulations.

    However when the matter came up for hearing before TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava, Sun counsel Gopal Jain accepted that the channels had been resumed after filing of the petition.

    However, he said the channels’ placement had been changed to the great disadvantage of the petitioner and cited some examples. Asianet Counsel Shirin Khajuria said there was no subsisting placement agreement between the two sides. She also stated that the displacements, if any, of the channels are made in accordance with the regulations.

     

    The Tribunal also asked Asianet counsel to take proper instructions and, if so advised, to file a brief reply on the issue of displacements of channels.

  • TDSAT to hear Sun’s petition alleging Asianet’s changing placement of important channels

    TDSAT to hear Sun’s petition alleging Asianet’s changing placement of important channels

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) will hear a petition by Sun Distribution Services Pvt Ltd on27 January alleging that the placement of important channels has been changed by Asianet Satellite Communication.

     

    The petition was initially filed alleging that Asianet had discontinued the distribution of Sun’s signals on its network without any notice and in violation of the regulations.

    However when the matter came up for hearing before TDSAT chairman Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava, Sun counsel Gopal Jain accepted that the channels had been resumed after filing of the petition.

    However, he said the channels’ placement had been changed to the great disadvantage of the petitioner and cited some examples. Asianet Counsel Shirin Khajuria said there was no subsisting placement agreement between the two sides. She also stated that the displacements, if any, of the channels are made in accordance with the regulations.

     

    The Tribunal also asked Asianet counsel to take proper instructions and, if so advised, to file a brief reply on the issue of displacements of channels.

  • TDSAT asks Canara Star MD to attend Star India dispute hearing

    TDSAT asks Canara Star MD to attend Star India dispute hearing

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) has directed Canara Star, Bangalore’s managing director to be present in the next hearing on 28 January to answer queries relating to its ongoing dispute with Star India.

     

    In the last hearing, which was held in the third week of December 2015, 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 Digital Addressable Area (DAS) of Bangalore said this was subject to the two parties failing to arrive at a final settlement.

     

    The directive by TDSAT chairman Justice Aftab Alam and members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava came after being informed by Canara Star counsel Tushar Singh that the parties had failed to resolve dispute.

     

    However, Star India counsels Kunal Tandon and Arjun Natarajan told the Tribunal that no attempts had been made by Canara Star to resolve the dispute.

     

    Justice Alam said that TDSAT would be forced to issue warrants if the MD of Canara Star is not present on the next date.

     

    In the last hearing, 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 – 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 Tandon and Natarajan had 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.

     

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

  • TDSAT asks GTPL Hathway to restore RCN Digital’s signals

    TDSAT asks GTPL Hathway to restore RCN Digital’s signals

    NEW DELHI: GTPL Hathway has been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to restore the signals to RCN Digital. 
     
    In their order, vacation bench of members Kuldip Singh and B B Srivastava said GTPL Hathway and RCN Digital to maintain the status quo as on 26 December, 2015.
     
    With this order, the Tribunal listed the petition by RCN Digital for 6 January. 
     
    Counsel Saurabh Upadhayay, counsel for RCN told the Tribunal that payment of Rs 1.17 crore had been made towards activation charges of the set top boxes (STBs) provided to RCN.
     
    But he said the signals were disconnected without any notice on 27 December.
     
    Upadhayay said that an agreement duly signed was sent by RCN to Hathway but had not been returned after the signature of the latter.