Tag: Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal

  • Arasu Cable TV faces broadcaster backlash over Rs 500 crore unpaid dues

    Arasu Cable TV faces broadcaster backlash over Rs 500 crore unpaid dues

    Mumbai: Broadcasters have voiced their concerns as TN govt-owned firm Arasu Cable TV (TACTV) fails to pay Rs 500-cr dues. Numerous broadcasters including Sony, Zee, Viacom, Disney Star, and Sun TV have raised concerns regarding unpaid dues which according to sources have been outstanding for over a year.

    In response to the prolonged non-payment, the Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF) addressed a letter in March to Tamil Nadu’s IT and Digital Services minister Palanivel Thiagarajan and TACTV’s managing director, A John Louis, calling for a fair and sustainable business environment.

    “Given the severity of this issue and its adverse impact on the industry, we urgently seek your esteemed intervention to expedite the clearance of TACTV’s subscription dues. Resolving this matter promptly is vital for restoring confidence and stability in Tamil Nadu’s broadcasting ecosystem,” the IBDF stated in the letter dated 13 March.

    Sources indicated that the Tamil Nadu state government has not yet addressed the broadcasters’ requests, citing TACTV’s financial difficulties.

    Thiagarajan was quoted as saying by the Tamil newspaper Dinamalar on 29 June that Arasu Cable owes Rs 525 crore in fees to television broadcasting companies. The Tamil Nadu Government Cable company is in a critical state. It’s up to the contractors to provide the necessary support.

    When asked why broadcasters haven’t cut off TV channel access to TACTV, a leading broadcaster’s executive mentioned fears that the state government might retaliate against their business in the region. Another executive highlighted concerns about potential copyright issues and signal piracy if they disconnected the service.

    Broadcasters have the option to appeal for pending dues through the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT).

    TACTV has also not complied with a 2022 Central government advisory directing Union ministries, state governments, and union territory administrations to cease involvement in broadcasting or distribution activities by 31 December 2023. This advisory aimed to prevent the politicization of broadcasting, as content could potentially promote the ruling party and influence voters.

    The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has included similar provisions in the draft broadcasting bill, which will gain legal authority once enacted. MIB officials have discussed the issue with TACTV, but the matter remains sub judice.

  • Delhi HC stays TDSAT order asking broadcasters to provide OTT content information

    Delhi HC stays TDSAT order asking broadcasters to provide OTT content information

    Mumbai: The Delhi High Court has stayed Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) order and the proceedings until the next date of hearing. TDSAT issued an order last week requiring broadcasters to provide information on content available on over-the-top (OTT) platforms.

    In past legal processes, Trai has publicly indicated that it does not regulate OTT platforms or the content that is associated with them.

    “Prima facie, the court finds itself unable to sustain the order of 20 September by TDSAT,” said the order dated 28 September by Delhi HC.

    According to the High Court, the TDSAT was not authorised to make the ‘contested decision’ while the main dispute over whether it had the authority to issue the ‘contested direction’ was still being resolved.

    A source informes Indiantelevision.com that the court judge made oral remarks saying “what kind of order is this? Later he also said (in a lighter vein) there seem to be lofty principles in the order.”

    Broadcasters are allegedly breaking Clause 5.6 of the TV channel uplinking and downlinking guidelines by providing linear channel signals to OTT services, claimed Trai.  

    This clause requires broadcasters to make satellite TV signals available to registered cable operators, multi-system operators, direct-to-home players, and internet protocol TV service providers.

    As the clause reads, “The applicant company shall provide satellite TV channel signal reception decoders only to MSOs/cable operators registered under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 or to a DTH operator registered under the DTH guidelines issued by the government of India or to an Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) service provider duly permitted under their existing telecom licence or authorised by the department of telecommunications or to a HITS operator duly permitted under the policy guidelines for HITS operators issued by the ministry of information and broadcasting to provide such service.”

    While OTT services are exempt from Trai oversight, broadcasters contend that Clause 5.6 has not been violated. They claim that both platforms controlled by broadcast networks and those owned by independent players are covered by this.

    Broadcasters including Sony, Star, and Sun TV had approached TDSAT to challenge Trai’s directive. The networks, on the other hand, had received no relief from the appellate tribunal, with TDSAT ordering them to provide the information to Trai within a week.

    The Court also questioned Trai’s authority to control OTT and make the requests for information that they did. In past legal proceedings, Trai has publicly indicated that it does not regulate OTT platforms or the content that is associated with them.

    When Trai requested certain broadcasters (such as Star India, Sony, and Sun TV) to submit detailed information on the content of TV channels that were available on OTT, the problem began.

    Dissatisfied broadcasters challenged Trai’s decision, which ordered the disclosure of information and architecture in TDSAT, among other things, by questioning Trai’s authority to request such information.

    Notably, the broadcasters asserted that Trai has always maintained in court proceedings that it does not regulate over-the-top (OTT) content.

    The TDSAT had previously provided broadcasters with ad-interim protection against Trai coercion. However, it later directed broadcasters to provide information, which resulted in the current petition before the Delhi High Court.

  • TDSAT recalls attachment proceedings against MSO Sadhna Media

    TDSAT recalls attachment proceedings against MSO Sadhna Media

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has recalled its order of attachment of properties of Sadhna Media Pvt Ltd after Siti Cable Network Ltd confirmed that the demand draft of Rs 26,87,793 handed over to it last month was in full and final settlement of a case pending since 2013.

    Consequently members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava also disposed of the execution application.

    Sadhna Group is a media and broadcast business conglomerate, running multiple television channels and engaged in varied businesses of media, education, advertising, medical, mining and aviation, based in New Delhi.

    Siti Networks Limited (Siti Cable Network) is a part of the Essel Group, which is one of India’s leading business houses with a diverse portfolio. Being India’s one of the most prominent multi-system operators (MSO), Sit is reaching a billion people.

    In an order on 17 January 2017, the tribunal also directed that District Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari, Delhi, and District Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, UP, may be informed about this order.

    The tribunal had passed the attachment order on 8 September 2016 after it was informed that despite an agreement on 22 April 2014, the MSO had failed to make any payment to Siti Cable. The details of the case can be had from the TDSAT website.

    Following this, the tribunal had asked Siti Cable on 30 April 2014 to withdraw its petition. However, Siti Cable filed a fresh application last year seeking attachment of the properties of the MSO — Sadhna Media.

    The evolution of the Sadhna Group can be traced to its beginning in 1977 as a small advertising agency. Apart from audio-visual programming and broadcasting, the group has varied business interests in the allied areas of television media – Sadhna/Sadhna News/Ishwar channels, advertising – print/outdoor, etc.

    It was in September, 2016, an execution application (E.A.) was filed by the petitioner decree holder, Siti Cable Network, for realisation of the decretal amount of Rs.18,53,650/- in terms of order of the tribunal dated 30.4.2014.

    Siti Cable Network and the respondent judgement debtor Sadhna Media Pvt. Ltd. concluded a settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre of the TDSAT on 22.4.2014. The terms of the settlement were as under: That it has been agreed by and between the parties that the respondent shall pay an amount of Rs. 18,53,650/- to the petitioner in full and final settlement of all dues. That the above amount shall be paid by the respondent in six equal monthly installments of Rs.3,08,942/- each commencing from 30 April, 2014, by way of a cheque/demand draft.

  • TDSAT recalls attachment proceedings against MSO Sadhna Media

    TDSAT recalls attachment proceedings against MSO Sadhna Media

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has recalled its order of attachment of properties of Sadhna Media Pvt Ltd after Siti Cable Network Ltd confirmed that the demand draft of Rs 26,87,793 handed over to it last month was in full and final settlement of a case pending since 2013.

    Consequently members B B Srivastava and A K Bhargava also disposed of the execution application.

    Sadhna Group is a media and broadcast business conglomerate, running multiple television channels and engaged in varied businesses of media, education, advertising, medical, mining and aviation, based in New Delhi.

    Siti Networks Limited (Siti Cable Network) is a part of the Essel Group, which is one of India’s leading business houses with a diverse portfolio. Being India’s one of the most prominent multi-system operators (MSO), Sit is reaching a billion people.

    In an order on 17 January 2017, the tribunal also directed that District Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari, Delhi, and District Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, UP, may be informed about this order.

    The tribunal had passed the attachment order on 8 September 2016 after it was informed that despite an agreement on 22 April 2014, the MSO had failed to make any payment to Siti Cable. The details of the case can be had from the TDSAT website.

    Following this, the tribunal had asked Siti Cable on 30 April 2014 to withdraw its petition. However, Siti Cable filed a fresh application last year seeking attachment of the properties of the MSO — Sadhna Media.

    The evolution of the Sadhna Group can be traced to its beginning in 1977 as a small advertising agency. Apart from audio-visual programming and broadcasting, the group has varied business interests in the allied areas of television media – Sadhna/Sadhna News/Ishwar channels, advertising – print/outdoor, etc.

    It was in September, 2016, an execution application (E.A.) was filed by the petitioner decree holder, Siti Cable Network, for realisation of the decretal amount of Rs.18,53,650/- in terms of order of the tribunal dated 30.4.2014.

    Siti Cable Network and the respondent judgement debtor Sadhna Media Pvt. Ltd. concluded a settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre of the TDSAT on 22.4.2014. The terms of the settlement were as under: That it has been agreed by and between the parties that the respondent shall pay an amount of Rs. 18,53,650/- to the petitioner in full and final settlement of all dues. That the above amount shall be paid by the respondent in six equal monthly installments of Rs.3,08,942/- each commencing from 30 April, 2014, by way of a cheque/demand draft.

  • TRAI issues comprehensive interconnect draft guidelines

    TRAI issues comprehensive interconnect draft guidelines

    NEW DELHI: Indian broadcast regulator came out today with its third set of draft guidelines within five days — this time on interconnection issues. With an aim to bring about more uniformity and transparency in the broadcast carriage sector, TRAI attempts to tackle spiralling carriage cost, rampant discount schemes and uneven agreements between stakeholders, while creating room for distribution cost reimbursement.

    As often reiterated by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), TRAI said no broadcaster will provide signals of pay television channels to a distributor of television channels without entering into a written interconnection agreement with such a distributor of television channels.

    In the draft regulations, called the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2016, published by TRAI today, the regulator said all broadcasters and distributors (DPOs) will publish on their websites a draft reference interconnection offer (RIO) for providing signals of all its pay television channels to a distributor of television channels within 30 days of commencement of these regulations or before launching of a pay television channel, in conformance with the provisions of the regulations and tariff orders notified by it.

    It also said that every broadcaster shall offer all television channels on a-la-carte basis to distributor of television channels. But it will be open to a broadcaster to offer its pay channels (in addition to offering of channels on a-la-carte basis) in form of bouquets.

    The draft inter-connect guidelines have been prepared after keeping in view the various orders and litigations pending in TDSAT or courts arising out of disputes between broadcasters and distributors or local cable broadcasters.

    Stakeholders have been asked to respond to the draft by 28 October 2016, with the year-end deadline for the final switch-off of analogue signals under the Digital Addressable Systems (DAS) less than three months away.   

    Interestingly, TRAI also dwells on carriage & placement fee — something that broadcasters have been saying is a growing menace hitting their bottomline — and discounts indicating how the issue can be tackled. 

    No carriage fee is to be paid by a broadcaster if the subscription of the channel is more than or equal to 20 per cent of the subscriber base. The rate of carriage fee has been capped at 20 paisa per channel per subscriber per month and the fee amount (charged by DPOs from TV channels) will decrease with increase in subscription numbers.

    In what could lead to some serious work in arithmetic, TRAI has suggested the distributors of TV channels may offer discounts on the carriage fee rate declared by them not exceeding 35 per cent of the rate of the carriage fee declared. Further, broadcaster can offer to a distributor a minimum of 20 per cent of the maximum retail price (MRP) of its pay channels or bouquets of pay channels as distribution fee. TV channels may also offer discounts on the MRP, provided that the sum of discounts and distribution fee in no case shall exceed 35 per cent of the declared MRP.

    The carriage fee payable by a broadcaster to the distributor under the interconnection agreement shall be calculated on the basis of the rate of carriage fee and the discounts offered in the reference interconnection offer. The term of the interconnection agreement will in no case be less than one year from the date of commencement of the agreement.

    The Authority suo-motu or otherwise may examine the reference interconnection offer submitted by a distributor of television channels and may modify the reference interconnection offer with the distributor amending the RIO accordingly and publish the same within fifteen days of receipt of the direction, if the Authority is of the opinion that the RIO has not been prepared in conformance with the provisions of the regulations and the tariff orders notified by the Authority.

    Pointing out that the new draft has attempted to keep the basic principles of non-exclusivity, non-discrimination, transparency, level playing field and fair competition in mind, TRAI said there should be a common interconnection framework for all addressable systems, DTH, HITS, DAS and IPTV.

    The “Must carry” provision for all addressable systems on first come first serve basis has been provided for and distributors have been asked to publish information about its platform, including available capacity and declare the rate of carriage fee.

    It will be mandatory for service providers to reduce the terms and conditions of all their interconnection agreements to writing and no service provider will provide for any clause in an interconnection agreement with the other service provider which would require, directly or indirectly, the latter to pay a minimum guaranteed amount.

    Furthermore, no broadcaster will provide signals of pay television channels to a distributor of television channels without entering into a written interconnection agreement with such distributor of television channels.

    The regulator said no broadcaster will provide for any clause, directly or indirectly, in an interconnection agreement with a distributor of TV channels which require such distributor to include the channels or bouquets of pay TV channels in any particular bouquet of channels offered by such distributor to the subscribers.

    A broadcaster may sign the interconnection agreement with distributors of TV channels for a-la-carte pay TV channels or bouquets of pay television channels of its subsidiary company or holding company or subsidiary company of the holding company which has obtained, in its name, the down-linking permission for its television channels from the Government, after written authorization by them.

    Every broadcaster will enter into a new written interconnection agreement with distributors of TV channels before the expiry of the existing interconnection agreement and notice of this will be given to the distributor at least 60 days prior to the date of expiry.

    The agreement between a broadcaster and a multi system operator (MSO) will include the details for describing the territory for the purpose of distribution of signals of television channels containing the registered area of operation of the MSO as mentioned in the registration granted by the Government. Provisions relating to territory covered or agreements between an MSO and LCO will not affect the direct-to-home platforms.

    The full draft guidelines could be accessed at http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/WhatsNew/Documents/Interconnection_Regulation_14_10_2016.pdf

    Also Read:   TRAI on carriage fee, other issues in draft interconnect guidelines

  • TRAI issues comprehensive interconnect draft guidelines

    TRAI issues comprehensive interconnect draft guidelines

    NEW DELHI: Indian broadcast regulator came out today with its third set of draft guidelines within five days — this time on interconnection issues. With an aim to bring about more uniformity and transparency in the broadcast carriage sector, TRAI attempts to tackle spiralling carriage cost, rampant discount schemes and uneven agreements between stakeholders, while creating room for distribution cost reimbursement.

    As often reiterated by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), TRAI said no broadcaster will provide signals of pay television channels to a distributor of television channels without entering into a written interconnection agreement with such a distributor of television channels.

    In the draft regulations, called the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2016, published by TRAI today, the regulator said all broadcasters and distributors (DPOs) will publish on their websites a draft reference interconnection offer (RIO) for providing signals of all its pay television channels to a distributor of television channels within 30 days of commencement of these regulations or before launching of a pay television channel, in conformance with the provisions of the regulations and tariff orders notified by it.

    It also said that every broadcaster shall offer all television channels on a-la-carte basis to distributor of television channels. But it will be open to a broadcaster to offer its pay channels (in addition to offering of channels on a-la-carte basis) in form of bouquets.

    The draft inter-connect guidelines have been prepared after keeping in view the various orders and litigations pending in TDSAT or courts arising out of disputes between broadcasters and distributors or local cable broadcasters.

    Stakeholders have been asked to respond to the draft by 28 October 2016, with the year-end deadline for the final switch-off of analogue signals under the Digital Addressable Systems (DAS) less than three months away.   

    Interestingly, TRAI also dwells on carriage & placement fee — something that broadcasters have been saying is a growing menace hitting their bottomline — and discounts indicating how the issue can be tackled. 

    No carriage fee is to be paid by a broadcaster if the subscription of the channel is more than or equal to 20 per cent of the subscriber base. The rate of carriage fee has been capped at 20 paisa per channel per subscriber per month and the fee amount (charged by DPOs from TV channels) will decrease with increase in subscription numbers.

    In what could lead to some serious work in arithmetic, TRAI has suggested the distributors of TV channels may offer discounts on the carriage fee rate declared by them not exceeding 35 per cent of the rate of the carriage fee declared. Further, broadcaster can offer to a distributor a minimum of 20 per cent of the maximum retail price (MRP) of its pay channels or bouquets of pay channels as distribution fee. TV channels may also offer discounts on the MRP, provided that the sum of discounts and distribution fee in no case shall exceed 35 per cent of the declared MRP.

    The carriage fee payable by a broadcaster to the distributor under the interconnection agreement shall be calculated on the basis of the rate of carriage fee and the discounts offered in the reference interconnection offer. The term of the interconnection agreement will in no case be less than one year from the date of commencement of the agreement.

    The Authority suo-motu or otherwise may examine the reference interconnection offer submitted by a distributor of television channels and may modify the reference interconnection offer with the distributor amending the RIO accordingly and publish the same within fifteen days of receipt of the direction, if the Authority is of the opinion that the RIO has not been prepared in conformance with the provisions of the regulations and the tariff orders notified by the Authority.

    Pointing out that the new draft has attempted to keep the basic principles of non-exclusivity, non-discrimination, transparency, level playing field and fair competition in mind, TRAI said there should be a common interconnection framework for all addressable systems, DTH, HITS, DAS and IPTV.

    The “Must carry” provision for all addressable systems on first come first serve basis has been provided for and distributors have been asked to publish information about its platform, including available capacity and declare the rate of carriage fee.

    It will be mandatory for service providers to reduce the terms and conditions of all their interconnection agreements to writing and no service provider will provide for any clause in an interconnection agreement with the other service provider which would require, directly or indirectly, the latter to pay a minimum guaranteed amount.

    Furthermore, no broadcaster will provide signals of pay television channels to a distributor of television channels without entering into a written interconnection agreement with such distributor of television channels.

    The regulator said no broadcaster will provide for any clause, directly or indirectly, in an interconnection agreement with a distributor of TV channels which require such distributor to include the channels or bouquets of pay TV channels in any particular bouquet of channels offered by such distributor to the subscribers.

    A broadcaster may sign the interconnection agreement with distributors of TV channels for a-la-carte pay TV channels or bouquets of pay television channels of its subsidiary company or holding company or subsidiary company of the holding company which has obtained, in its name, the down-linking permission for its television channels from the Government, after written authorization by them.

    Every broadcaster will enter into a new written interconnection agreement with distributors of TV channels before the expiry of the existing interconnection agreement and notice of this will be given to the distributor at least 60 days prior to the date of expiry.

    The agreement between a broadcaster and a multi system operator (MSO) will include the details for describing the territory for the purpose of distribution of signals of television channels containing the registered area of operation of the MSO as mentioned in the registration granted by the Government. Provisions relating to territory covered or agreements between an MSO and LCO will not affect the direct-to-home platforms.

    The full draft guidelines could be accessed at http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/WhatsNew/Documents/Interconnection_Regulation_14_10_2016.pdf

    Also Read:   TRAI on carriage fee, other issues in draft interconnect guidelines

  • TDSAT rules in favour of broadcaster against MSO

    TDSAT rules in favour of broadcaster against MSO

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has reiterated that failure to collect fees from subscribers is not sufficient ground for any multi-system operator or distributor for non-payment of earlier dues or monthly subscription to a broadcaster.

    Member B B Srivastava agreed with an earlier TDSAT order on 6 October 2014 quoted by Taj TV counsel Upender Thakur which is the respondent in the petition filed by Manthan Broadband Service Pvt Ltd.

    The Tribunal in Petition No. 144(C) of 2014 (Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Digicable Network (lndia) Pvt Ltd.) had observed:

    “To my mind, the failure to collect from the ground is not a sufficient justification for not making payment to the broadcaster its earlier dues and the current monthly license fees in time.”

    After hearing counsel for both sides, TDSAT extended by 10 days the time given to Manthan to clear its dues to Taj TV ‘by way of one time indulgence.’

    Also read:   VXL and linked LCOs barred from receiving signals from any other MSO

    Also read:   TDSAT forbids VXL Digital to receive signals from any MSO after dispute with Indiacast

  • TDSAT rules in favour of broadcaster against MSO

    TDSAT rules in favour of broadcaster against MSO

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has reiterated that failure to collect fees from subscribers is not sufficient ground for any multi-system operator or distributor for non-payment of earlier dues or monthly subscription to a broadcaster.

    Member B B Srivastava agreed with an earlier TDSAT order on 6 October 2014 quoted by Taj TV counsel Upender Thakur which is the respondent in the petition filed by Manthan Broadband Service Pvt Ltd.

    The Tribunal in Petition No. 144(C) of 2014 (Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Digicable Network (lndia) Pvt Ltd.) had observed:

    “To my mind, the failure to collect from the ground is not a sufficient justification for not making payment to the broadcaster its earlier dues and the current monthly license fees in time.”

    After hearing counsel for both sides, TDSAT extended by 10 days the time given to Manthan to clear its dues to Taj TV ‘by way of one time indulgence.’

    Also read:   VXL and linked LCOs barred from receiving signals from any other MSO

    Also read:   TDSAT forbids VXL Digital to receive signals from any MSO after dispute with Indiacast

  • Don’t disconnect signals to part-paying MSO, ZEEL directed

    Don’t disconnect signals to part-paying MSO, ZEEL directed

    NEW DELHI: Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal not to disconnect the signals to Seven Star Dot Com Pvt Ltd provided the latter keeps paying the monthly subscription on the basis of invoices raised.

    Listing the matter for further hearing on 16 September, the tribunal member B B Srivastava, on 2 September 2016, said that the Tribunal had been informed by Seven Star counsel Naveen Chawla that a sum of Rs 50 lakh had been paid by his client as an on-account payment.

    The Tribunal said this payment would be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties and will be subject to the final order of the Tribunal.

    In another case, the Tribunal adjourned to 21 September 2016 a matter by Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd after the Tribunal was informed that Pragya Vision Pvt Ltd had only paid two cheques of Rs 1 lakh and Rs 10,000 against the demand of Rs 94,11,572. Adjourning the matter, the Tribunal directed that the Managing Director of Pragya Vision – who was present – will be present on the next date as well. The counsel for Pragya said his client would submit an affidavit about the schedule of payments.

    In a third case the same day, INX News Pvt Ltd Mumbai counsel Nittin Bhatia informed the Tribunal that four instalments of the payments due to Manthan Broadband of Kolkata had been made. But, the matter was put off to 13 September 2016 as Mathan counsel Anurup Narula wanted time to respond to the reply to its miscellaneous application filed by INX.

  • Don’t disconnect signals to part-paying MSO, ZEEL directed

    Don’t disconnect signals to part-paying MSO, ZEEL directed

    NEW DELHI: Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal not to disconnect the signals to Seven Star Dot Com Pvt Ltd provided the latter keeps paying the monthly subscription on the basis of invoices raised.

    Listing the matter for further hearing on 16 September, the tribunal member B B Srivastava, on 2 September 2016, said that the Tribunal had been informed by Seven Star counsel Naveen Chawla that a sum of Rs 50 lakh had been paid by his client as an on-account payment.

    The Tribunal said this payment would be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties and will be subject to the final order of the Tribunal.

    In another case, the Tribunal adjourned to 21 September 2016 a matter by Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd after the Tribunal was informed that Pragya Vision Pvt Ltd had only paid two cheques of Rs 1 lakh and Rs 10,000 against the demand of Rs 94,11,572. Adjourning the matter, the Tribunal directed that the Managing Director of Pragya Vision – who was present – will be present on the next date as well. The counsel for Pragya said his client would submit an affidavit about the schedule of payments.

    In a third case the same day, INX News Pvt Ltd Mumbai counsel Nittin Bhatia informed the Tribunal that four instalments of the payments due to Manthan Broadband of Kolkata had been made. But, the matter was put off to 13 September 2016 as Mathan counsel Anurup Narula wanted time to respond to the reply to its miscellaneous application filed by INX.