INDUSIND MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS LTD Vs. STAR INDIA PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed by the respondent No. 1 (applicant herein) alleging violation of the order of this Tribunal dated 22nd February, 2006 by which the petitioner is receiving signals as an interim measure on conditions mentioned therein. In this application the applicant has contended that the parties are bound by the terms and conditions mentioned in the Term Sheet signed by the parties dated 14th February,2006 and as per the said Term Sheet the petitioner was bound to provide the list of cable operators along with their respective declared subscribers' number and areas of operation which the learned counsel for the applicant submits has not been done and contrary to the contention of the parties and the provisions of the regulations the petitioner has been supplying signals unauthorisedly to the consumers who have not been covered by the Term Sheet.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner in response to this particular complaint made by the applicant pointed out from paragraph-2 of the order of this Tribunal dated 22nd February,2006 that this very issue has been left open by this Tribunal to be decided at the time of hearing of the petition. The issue considered in that order was in regard to the rights of a signal provider to seek particulars of its subscribers. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner in support of this first complaint of the applicant contended that what is left to be decided by the Tribunal at a subsequent stage is the particulars of all the subscribers which was declared by the applicant but what the applicant is now seeking in clause-6 of the Term Sheet is the number of cable operators and their subscribers to whom the petitioner is giving the feed. This Tribunal does not think that is the correct interpretation of the order passed by it. The moot question whether a service provider has a right to get particulars of the subscribers, be they cable operators or the ultimate consumers, is the issue which is left open to be decided by this Tribunal at the time of final hearing. Therefore, I am of the opinion that there is no violation of the order of this Tribunal dated 22nd February,2006 on this count.

(3.) IT is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the petitioner is not paying the subscription as required under clauses 1,2 & 8 of the Term Sheet consequent to which there is a arrears of Rs. 2,52,51,354.28 for the month of January,2006. According to those clauses the learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the petitioner is liable to pay the amount within 45 days plus 15 days grace period to pay the subscription fee from the first day of the month. Payment has not been made according to the said schedule.