Bakhshish Kaur, J. - (1.) M /s V.V. Telecom Ltd. filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining M/s. HFCL INFOTEL LTD. from issuing any press release, statements, advertisement or convey or communicate to the general public at large that it has been granted uncircumscribed rights to provide basic telephone services along with limited mobility. It also prayed for issuance of a mandatory injunction directing the Defendant to disclose prominently and boldly in all the press release, communications, advertisements or any other method or mode by which the Defendant may seek to solicit the subscribers that the services are provisional as per the order dated 29.1.2001 by the TDSAT, and to provide a clause in the agreement to be entered into by it with the subscribers that the services are provisional and subject to the decision of TRAI in petition No. 1 of 2001 and in the event the licences are revoked, the subscribers shall be entitled to refund along with cost
(2.) AN application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was also filed by the Plaintiff alongwith the suit seeking interior directions and the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division). Jalandhar vide his impugned order dated February 15, 2001 disposed of the application restraining the Defendant from issuing the press statements or advertisements soliciting business from the general public for providing fixed service with limited mobility without disclosing the true contents, effect or impact, direct or indirect of the order dated 29 1.2001 issued by TDSAT boldly and prominently Notice to the Defendant was issued for February 24, 2001. The Defendant -Petitioner aggrieved by the order dated February 15. 2001 has invoked the extra -ordinary jurisdiction of this Court by filing the present revision under Section 227 of the Constitution of India to assail the order on the ground that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is specifically barred under Section 15 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act. 1997 (in short the Act).
(3.) I have heard Sh.H.L. Sibal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Bhatia Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sh. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate, Learned Counsel for the Respondent.;