RAJDHANI COMMUNICATION NETWORK PVT LTD Vs. SET DISCOVERY PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two Petitions, i.e., Petition Nos. 4(C) of 2006 and 5(C) of 2006 were filed under Section 14 and 14A of the TRAI Act 1997 as amended in 2000, on similar cause of action, the petitioners being M/s Rajdhani Communication Network Pvt. Ltd. and Trans Yamuna Communication Network (P) Ltd. respectively and the respondent being M/s SET Discovery Pvt Ltd in both the cases. THE case pertains to the disconnection of TV signals of the petitioners by the respondent on 8th January, 2006. Both the petitioners are franchisees of Siti Cable Network Pvt Ltd and have their headends for distribution of the TV signal over the cable network in their respective areas.

(2.) In Petition No. 4(C) of 2006, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he has been operating in the areas of Ashok Vihar, Lawrence Road, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Bharti Nagar, Tri Nagar, Shastri Nagar, Inderlok, Gulabi Bagh, Rana Pratap Bagh, Shakti Nagar, Ghantaghar, Pratap Nagar and Kishan Ganj since 1995. He said that after a notice on 6th January, 2006, his signals were disconnected on 8th January, 2006 by the respondent on the ground that he was retransmitting signals in areas beyond his area of jurisdiction as per the agreement. He said that the Petitioner is not providing cable TV service in Yamuna Vihar and has no operations in Brij Puri, Karaval Nagar, Khajuri, Monga Nagar, Nehru Vihar and Kabir Nagar and there can be no question of his trespassing to these areas as alleged by the respondent. He said at the outset that he was not hiding the fact that he had started supplying signals in areas of Patel Nagar, Moti Nagar, Karam Pura, Karol Bagh and Inder Puri in the month of December, 2005 and he has admitted the same in the petition. He however, said that he had been supplying signals in these areas earlier also and had now restarted the same. It was also contended by the petitioner that the agreement, which was got signed from it by the respondent on 1st January, 2003, did not specify its area of operation. At the time of signing of the agreement, the territory was left blank in the agreement form and copy of the agreement was not given to the petitioner. The respondent on this issue stated that M/s Rajdhani Communication was authorized as per the agreement to provide cable service in Ashok Vihar whereas it had violated the agreement by giving signals in areas other than Ashok Vihar. The respondent stated that it had given notice to Siti Cable Network on 27th December, 2005 whereby it had informed Siti Cable Network that agreement with the petitioner does not extend to the territories comprising Patel Nagar, Moti Nagar, Karampura, Karol Bagh, Rajinder Nagar, Ranjeet Nagar, Krishna Nagar, Savita Vihar and Laxmi Nagar. Vide this letter it had directed the petitioner not to extend these signals to the areas mentioned therein as these were beyond its authorized area of jurisdiction. It was the contention of the petitioner that it had earlier in the year 2002-03 been providing signals to Patel Nagar, Moti Nagar, Karam Pura, Karol Bagh and Inder Puri, which has been admitted by the respondent in the letter dated 27th December, 2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner said that the recommencement of the signals was permitted by the respondent and to support his case, he referred to minutes of the meeting held between their main company, Siti Cable Network and the officials of SET Discovery, the extracts of which are reproduced below:-

(3.) ...