Tag: Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal

TDSAT directs Zeel to sign RIO based interconnect pacts with five MSOs

NEW DELHI: Five multi-system operators have been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to pay Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd (Zeel) a sum of Rs 3 crore to enable the signing of an RIO based interconnect agreement.

Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the agreement would be from 19 May, the date from which the petitioners are operating on that basis.

Listing the matter to come up on 16 August, the tribunal on 2 June made it clear that both the payment of Rs 3 crores and the direction for execution of the RIO based agreement is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and will abide by the final result of the petition.

The petitions were filed by Fastway Transmission Pvt Ltd, Jagsumi Perspectives Pvt Ltd, Novabase Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, and Radiant Digitek Network Pvt. Ltd against a general notice asking all the MSOs who on the date of issuance (11 May) of the fresh RIO by Zee Entertainment did not have a subsisting interconnect agreement with it to execute an agreement based on the RIO.

The petitioners were willing to execute an RIO based agreement until the validity and legality of the RIO coming under challenge in this petition and several other petitions on that issue is finally decided by the tribunal.

But the tribunal said the difficulty was that Zeel said the petitioners owe the sum of Rs 5.4 crores and odd and unless the dues are cleared, it is not inclined even to enter into the RIO based inter connect agreement. But the petitioners say the dues, if properly worked out, would come down to Rs 1,66,16,726, which the petitioners are agreeable to pay.

June 10, 2016
TDSAT directs Zeel to sign RIO based interconnect pacts with five MSOs

NEW DELHI: Five multi-system operators have been asked by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to pay Zee Entertainment Enterprise Ltd (Zeel) a sum of Rs 3 crore to enable the signing of an RIO based interconnect agreement.

Chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the agreement would be from 19 May, the date from which the petitioners are operating on that basis.

Listing the matter to come up on 16 August, the tribunal on 2 June made it clear that both the payment of Rs 3 crores and the direction for execution of the RIO based agreement is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and will abide by the final result of the petition.

The petitions were filed by Fastway Transmission Pvt Ltd, Jagsumi Perspectives Pvt Ltd, Novabase Digital Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, and Radiant Digitek Network Pvt. Ltd against a general notice asking all the MSOs who on the date of issuance (11 May) of the fresh RIO by Zee Entertainment did not have a subsisting interconnect agreement with it to execute an agreement based on the RIO.

The petitioners were willing to execute an RIO based agreement until the validity and legality of the RIO coming under challenge in this petition and several other petitions on that issue is finally decided by the tribunal.

But the tribunal said the difficulty was that Zeel said the petitioners owe the sum of Rs 5.4 crores and odd and unless the dues are cleared, it is not inclined even to enter into the RIO based inter connect agreement. But the petitioners say the dues, if properly worked out, would come down to Rs 1,66,16,726, which the petitioners are agreeable to pay.

June 10, 2016
TDSAT to Taj TV: Restore signals to All Digital Network

NEW DELHI: Taj Television India Pvt. Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore the supply of signals to All Digital Network India Ltd with the MSO agreeing it will makes the aggregate payment of five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each payable by 30 June.

The supply of signals thus restored, shall continue provided further payments, if any, are made in terms of the schedule, according to the order by chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava who listed the case for 22 July. The tribunal also recalled its order restraining the petitioner and GTPL from making any withdrawals from their bank accounts.

Earlier, a payment schedule was submitted before the tribunal on behalf of GTPL which had accepted to pay off the dues of All Digital Network to Taj Television. Under that schedule, five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each were payable to Taj Television by 30 June with the fourth and fifth instalment falling due on that date.

But the tribunal was informed on 3 June that neither the GTPL nor All Digital had paid a single instalment under the schedule. Further, it was told that GTPL is also reported to have walked out of the arrangement with All Digital.

However, All Digital counsel Manikya Khanna told the tribunal that since GTPL was not complying with the commitment given on its behalf, All Digital accepted its liability to pay the dues of Taj TV and it will make payment in terms of the schedule earlier given on behalf of GTPL.

June 9, 2016
TDSAT to Taj TV: Restore signals to All Digital Network

NEW DELHI: Taj Television India Pvt. Ltd has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to restore the supply of signals to All Digital Network India Ltd with the MSO agreeing it will makes the aggregate payment of five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each payable by 30 June.

The supply of signals thus restored, shall continue provided further payments, if any, are made in terms of the schedule, according to the order by chairman Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava who listed the case for 22 July. The tribunal also recalled its order restraining the petitioner and GTPL from making any withdrawals from their bank accounts.

Earlier, a payment schedule was submitted before the tribunal on behalf of GTPL which had accepted to pay off the dues of All Digital Network to Taj Television. Under that schedule, five instalments of Rs 86,64,000 each were payable to Taj Television by 30 June with the fourth and fifth instalment falling due on that date.

But the tribunal was informed on 3 June that neither the GTPL nor All Digital had paid a single instalment under the schedule. Further, it was told that GTPL is also reported to have walked out of the arrangement with All Digital.

However, All Digital counsel Manikya Khanna told the tribunal that since GTPL was not complying with the commitment given on its behalf, All Digital accepted its liability to pay the dues of Taj TV and it will make payment in terms of the schedule earlier given on behalf of GTPL.

June 9, 2016
TRAI extends time for interconnect agreement reactions

NEW DELHI: Several stakeholders have complained to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India that most consumers are not even aware of the rates of various television channels and so the local cable operators were at the receiving end as they had to deal with the viewers.

At an Open House discussion on the interconnection network for broadcasting TV Services distributed through addressable systems most stakeholders comprosing local cable operators and multi system operators raised issues that they said needed greater introspection. Cable Operators President of India President Roop Sharma said there was shortage of set top boxes and the consumer was not aware of what STB he should acquire.

K K Sharma who edits Cable Quest said that no attention had been paid to the entry of OTT and the cross ownership that has come with this new phenomenon. The agreement has to be clear on this issue.

Later, TRAI extended the date by one week to 10 June for comments on its consultation paper on
Interconnect agreements for DAS areas. The date for counter-comments will remain the same – 17 June.

TRAI had asked stakeholders to give suggestions on how a level playing can be created among different service providers using different addressable systems.

It wanted to know whether there should be a common interconnection regulatory framework be mandated for all types of addressable systems.

In the Consultation Paper issued on 4 May, it asked if there is any need to allow agreements based on mutually agreed terms, which donot form part of RIO, in digital addressable systems where calculation of fee can be based on subscription numbers. .

The Paper has been issued not merely because the country is marching towards the last phase of DAS, but also in view of several judgments of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal where it has disallowed payments in the absence of agreements despite mutual oral agreements.

TRAI wants to know how the interconnection agreements entered on mutually agreed terms meet the requirement of providing a levelplaying field amongst service providers can be ensured, and the ways for effectively implementing non-discrimination on ground.

June 8, 2016
TRAI extends time for interconnect agreement reactions

NEW DELHI: Several stakeholders have complained to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India that most consumers are not even aware of the rates of various television channels and so the local cable operators were at the receiving end as they had to deal with the viewers.

At an Open House discussion on the interconnection network for broadcasting TV Services distributed through addressable systems most stakeholders comprosing local cable operators and multi system operators raised issues that they said needed greater introspection. Cable Operators President of India President Roop Sharma said there was shortage of set top boxes and the consumer was not aware of what STB he should acquire.

K K Sharma who edits Cable Quest said that no attention had been paid to the entry of OTT and the cross ownership that has come with this new phenomenon. The agreement has to be clear on this issue.

Later, TRAI extended the date by one week to 10 June for comments on its consultation paper on
Interconnect agreements for DAS areas. The date for counter-comments will remain the same – 17 June.

TRAI had asked stakeholders to give suggestions on how a level playing can be created among different service providers using different addressable systems.

It wanted to know whether there should be a common interconnection regulatory framework be mandated for all types of addressable systems.

In the Consultation Paper issued on 4 May, it asked if there is any need to allow agreements based on mutually agreed terms, which donot form part of RIO, in digital addressable systems where calculation of fee can be based on subscription numbers. .

The Paper has been issued not merely because the country is marching towards the last phase of DAS, but also in view of several judgments of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal where it has disallowed payments in the absence of agreements despite mutual oral agreements.

TRAI wants to know how the interconnection agreements entered on mutually agreed terms meet the requirement of providing a levelplaying field amongst service providers can be ensured, and the ways for effectively implementing non-discrimination on ground.

June 8, 2016
TDSAT rejects MSO Honey Sky Vision’s petition against Sai Media

New Delhi: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has rejected a petition by multisystem operator seeking to recover Rs 10.5 lakh from Sai Prasad Media Pvt Ltd which broadcasts ‘News Express’ amongst others.

Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said: “We find that the whole exercise of execution of channel placement agreement and subsequent behaviour of petitioner as well as the respondent is completely opaque and ambiguous to say the least and hence non-maintainable.”

The petitioner had failed to produce any invoice which it might have raised or any authentic statement of accounts.

Meanwhile, Sai Media had filed an affidavit stating it had paid three-fourths of the amount due but produced a document. The tribunal felt its “authenticity was doubtful”.

The case of the petitioner had been that it had executed a placement agreement with Sai Media at the behest of the respondent for a period of 12 months beginning from 28 July 2012 and terminating on 27 July 2012. The consideration money was Rs 14 lakhs plus service tax; and it was payable in four equal installments. In consideration of this amount the petitioner was supposed to place the respondent’s channel ‘News Express’ on ‘S’ band. The petitioner has stated that it complied with all its obligations.under the channel placement agreement by carrying/placing the channel of the respondent at the desired frequency/band to the complete satisfaction of the respondent. It is also stated that the representatives/officials of the respondent company regularly visited the network/units of the petitioner in various• areas of Delhi.

May 25, 2016
TDSAT rejects MSO Honey Sky Vision’s petition against Sai Media

New Delhi: The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal has rejected a petition by multisystem operator seeking to recover Rs 10.5 lakh from Sai Prasad Media Pvt Ltd which broadcasts ‘News Express’ amongst others.

Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said: “We find that the whole exercise of execution of channel placement agreement and subsequent behaviour of petitioner as well as the respondent is completely opaque and ambiguous to say the least and hence non-maintainable.”

The petitioner had failed to produce any invoice which it might have raised or any authentic statement of accounts.

Meanwhile, Sai Media had filed an affidavit stating it had paid three-fourths of the amount due but produced a document. The tribunal felt its “authenticity was doubtful”.

The case of the petitioner had been that it had executed a placement agreement with Sai Media at the behest of the respondent for a period of 12 months beginning from 28 July 2012 and terminating on 27 July 2012. The consideration money was Rs 14 lakhs plus service tax; and it was payable in four equal installments. In consideration of this amount the petitioner was supposed to place the respondent’s channel ‘News Express’ on ‘S’ band. The petitioner has stated that it complied with all its obligations.under the channel placement agreement by carrying/placing the channel of the respondent at the desired frequency/band to the complete satisfaction of the respondent. It is also stated that the representatives/officials of the respondent company regularly visited the network/units of the petitioner in various• areas of Delhi.

May 25, 2016
TDSAT vacates order staying disconnection of signals to MSO

NEW DELHI: An order staying disconnection of signals of Eenadu TV to Hyderabad Cable Digital Services Pvt. Ltd has been vacated by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal.

Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the order given late last week was being vacated as Eenadu TV Counsel Prabhat Ranjan had produced ample documents that “belie the allegations made in the petition that the supply of signals was abruptly disconnected without any notices, etc.”

The Tribunal said that Ranjan had produced documents that showed that the multi-system operator owes a substantial amount as dues of subscription fees. Ranjan also stated that the interconnect agreement between the two sides had come to an end.

Listing the matter for 27 May, the Tribunal asked Ranjan to file Eenadu TV’s reply
bringing all the documents on record and asked the MSO to file a rejoinder, if any, within a week thereafter.

May 13, 2016
TDSAT vacates order staying disconnection of signals to MSO

NEW DELHI: An order staying disconnection of signals of Eenadu TV to Hyderabad Cable Digital Services Pvt. Ltd has been vacated by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal.

Chairman justice Aftab Alam and member B B Srivastava said the order given late last week was being vacated as Eenadu TV Counsel Prabhat Ranjan had produced ample documents that “belie the allegations made in the petition that the supply of signals was abruptly disconnected without any notices, etc.”

The Tribunal said that Ranjan had produced documents that showed that the multi-system operator owes a substantial amount as dues of subscription fees. Ranjan also stated that the interconnect agreement between the two sides had come to an end.

Listing the matter for 27 May, the Tribunal asked Ranjan to file Eenadu TV’s reply
bringing all the documents on record and asked the MSO to file a rejoinder, if any, within a week thereafter.

May 13, 2016