WORLD SPORT GROUP (MAURITIUS) LTD Vs. MSM SATELLITE (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD
LAWS(SC)-2014-1-48
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on
January 24,2014
World Sport Group (Mauritius) Ltd
Appellant
VERSUS
Msm Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
CLAXTON ENGINEERING V. TXM OLAJ - ESGAZ KUTAO KTF [REFERRED TO]ABDUL KADIR SHAMSUDDIN BUBERE VS. MADHAV PRABHAKAR OAK [REFERRED TO]
V O TRAGTOROEXPORT MOSCOW VS. TARAPORE AND COMPANY [REFERRED TO]
OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION VS. WESTERN COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA TELECOM LIMITED VS. STERLITE INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
ZEE TELEFILMS LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
INDIA HOUSEHOLD AND HEALTHCARE LTD VS. L G HOUSEHOLD AND HEALTHCARE LTD [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. BOGHARA POLYFAB PVT LTD [REFERRED TO]
BRANCH MANAGER MAGMA LEASING AND FINANCE LIMITED VS. POTLURI MADHAVILATA [REFERRED TO]
N RADHAKRISHNAN VS. MAESTRO ENGINEERS [REFERRED TO]
BOOZ ALLEN AND HAMILTON INC VS. SBI HOME FINANCE LTD [REFERRED TO]
SMS TEA ESTATES PVT LTD VS. CHANDMARI TEA CO PVT LTD [REFERRED TO]
REVA ELECTRIC CAR COMPANY PVT LTD VS. GREEN MOBIL [REFERRED TO]
H G OOMOR SAIT VS. O ASLAM SAIT [REFERRED TO]
CHLORO CONTROLS (I) P. LTD VS. SEVERN TRENT WATER PURIFICATION INC [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
A AYYASAMY VS. A PARAMASIVAM [LAWS(MAD)-2014-12-66] [REFERRED TO]MCDONALDS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. VIKRAM BAKSHI & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2016-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
SPENTEX INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP [LAWS(DLH)-2020-5-34] [REFERRED TO]
SUPER SMELTERS LIMITED VS. VISA RESOURCES PTE LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2021-1-31] [REFERRED TO]
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL BV AND ORS. VS. TRIVITRON HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-8-151] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SARATHI ENTERPRISES [LAWS(BOM)-2015-4-78] [REFERRED TO]
VISA RERSSOURCES PTE LTD. VS. SUPER SMELTERS LTD. & ANR. [LAWS(CAL)-2020-7-26] [REFERRED TO]
DR. BINA MODI VS. LALIT KUMAR MODI & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2020-12-17] [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM CHAND RAKESH KUMAR VS. DERCO FOODS [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-76] [REFERRED TO]
MCDONALD’S INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. VIKRAM BAKSHI AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2016-7-49] [REFERRED TO]
RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS. ADVERTISING STANDARDS COUNCIL OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2024-5-5] [REFERRED TO]
BINA MODI VS. LALIT KUMAR MODI [LAWS(DLH)-2020-12-106] [REFERRED TO]
ORISSA METALIKS PVT. LTD VS. SBW ELECTRO MECHANICS IMPORT EXPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(CAL)-2023-6-32] [REFERRED TO]
MONTBLANC SIMPLO GMBH VS. ENTRACK INTERNATIONAL TRADING PVT LTD [LAWS(GJH)-2015-1-227] [REFERRED TO]
M/S SHREE GANESH METALS VS. GLENCORE INTERNATIONAL AG & ANR. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-11-306] [REFERRED TO]
GALA TEA LTD VS. SHREE KRISHNA EXPORT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-1486] [REFERRED TO]
CLIFF NAVIGATION S A VS. LMJ INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2015-7-24] [REFERRED TO]
PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD., KOLKATA VS. BASAL STEELS AND POWER PVT. LTD., HUDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-2017-9-80] [REFERRED TO]
DHOLI SPINTEX PVT. LTD. VS. LOUIS DREYFUS COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-25] [REFERRED TO]
GALATEA LTD VS. SHREE KRISHNA EXPORTS [LAWS(GJH)-2021-12-55] [REFERRED TO]
N.N. GLOBAL MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. INDO UNIQUE FLAME LTD [LAWS(SC)-2023-4-105] [REFERRED TO]
KORES (INDIA) LTD. VS. ARNAV INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD [LAWS(SC)-2017-9-123] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRABHAI ALIAS SAMIRBHAI NATVARLAL SHAH VS. CHANDRAJITBHAI NATVARLAL SHAH [LAWS(GJH)-2021-10-192] [REFERRED TO]
AVTAR SINGH BAINS VS. GURDEV KAUR AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2016-1-82] [REFERRED TO]
RISHABH ENTERPRISES AND ANR. VS. AMEET LALCHAND SHAH AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-57] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDRA PAROLIA VS. BISHWANATH PAROLIA [LAWS(CAL)-2014-6-67] [REFERRED TO]
BHARTI TELE-VENTURES LTD & ORS VS. DSS ENTERPRISES PVT LTD & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-7-53] [REFERRED TO]
BALASORE ALLOYS LIMITED VS. MEDIMA LLC [LAWS(CAL)-2020-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
SUPERON SCHWEISSTECHNIK INDIA LTD VS. EUROPAISCHE HOLDING INTERCITO [LAWS(DLH)-2022-2-267] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. VODAFONE GROUP PLC UNITED KINGDOM & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-135] [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM BAKSHI VS. MC DONALDS INDIA PVT LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2014-12-171] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This is an appeal against the order dated 17.09.2010 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Appeal (Lodging) No.534 of 2010.
Facts:
(3.)The facts very briefly are that on 30.11.2007 the Board of Control for Cricket in India (for short 'BCCI') invited tenders for IPL (Indian Premier League) Media Rights for a period of ten years from 2008 to 2017 on a worldwide basis. Amongst the tenders submitted, the bid of World Sports Group India (for short 'WSG India') was accepted by BCCI. By a pre-bid arrangement, however, the respondent was to get the media rights for the sub-continent for the period from 2008 to 2010. Accordingly, on 21.01.2008 BCCI and the respondent entered into a Media Rights License Agreement for the period from 2008 to 2012 for a sum of US$274.50 million. After the first IPL season, the BCCI terminated the agreement dated 21.01.2008 between BCCI and the respondent for the Indian sub-continent and commenced negotiations with WSG India. On 14.03.2009, the respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') against the BCCI before the Bombay High Court praying for injunction against the BCCI from acting on the termination letter dated 14.03.2009 and for preventing BCCI from granting the rights under the agreement dated 21.01.2008 to any third party. Pursuant to the negotiations between BCCI and WSG India, BCCI entered into an agreement with the appellant whereunder the media rights for the Indian sub-continent for the period 2009 to 2017 was awarded to the appellant for a value of Rs.4,791.08 crores. To operate the media rights in India, the appellant was required to seek a sub-licensee within seventy two hours. Though, this time period was extended twice, the appellant was not able to get a sub-licensee. Thereafter, the appellant claimed to have allowed media rights in India to have lapsed and then facilitated on 25.03.2009, a new Media Rights License Agreement between the BCCI and the respondent for the Indian sub- continent for the same contract value of Rs.4,791.08 crores. BCCI and WSG India, however, were to continue with the Rest of the World media rights.
(2.)This is an appeal against the order dated 17.09.2010 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Appeal (Lodging) No.534 of 2010.
Facts:
(3.)The facts very briefly are that on 30.11.2007 the Board of Control for Cricket in India (for short 'BCCI') invited tenders for IPL (Indian Premier League) Media Rights for a period of ten years from 2008 to 2017 on a worldwide basis. Amongst the tenders submitted, the bid of World Sports Group India (for short 'WSG India') was accepted by BCCI. By a pre-bid arrangement, however, the respondent was to get the media rights for the sub-continent for the period from 2008 to 2010. Accordingly, on 21.01.2008 BCCI and the respondent entered into a Media Rights License Agreement for the period from 2008 to 2012 for a sum of US$274.50 million. After the first IPL season, the BCCI terminated the agreement dated 21.01.2008 between BCCI and the respondent for the Indian sub-continent and commenced negotiations with WSG India. On 14.03.2009, the respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') against the BCCI before the Bombay High Court praying for injunction against the BCCI from acting on the termination letter dated 14.03.2009 and for preventing BCCI from granting the rights under the agreement dated 21.01.2008 to any third party. Pursuant to the negotiations between BCCI and WSG India, BCCI entered into an agreement with the appellant whereunder the media rights for the Indian sub-continent for the period 2009 to 2017 was awarded to the appellant for a value of Rs.4,791.08 crores. To operate the media rights in India, the appellant was required to seek a sub-licensee within seventy two hours. Though, this time period was extended twice, the appellant was not able to get a sub-licensee. Thereafter, the appellant claimed to have allowed media rights in India to have lapsed and then facilitated on 25.03.2009, a new Media Rights License Agreement between the BCCI and the respondent for the Indian sub- continent for the same contract value of Rs.4,791.08 crores. BCCI and WSG India, however, were to continue with the Rest of the World media rights.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.