TATA SKY LTD AND ANR. Vs ESPN SOFTWARE INDIA PVT. LTD.

Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal28 May 2010HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S.B. SINHA, CHAIRPERSON, MR. G. D. GAIHA, MEMBER, MR.P.K. RASTOGI, MEMBER

Case No.BROADCASTING PETITION/155/2010

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the regulator has undertaken to place its recommendations on the very issue in dispute before a higher forum within a fixed time, the Tribunal may defer the hearing of the matter and the grant of any ad-interim relief until those recommendations are available. In the meantime the status quo is to be maintained without prejudice to the parties' rights and contentions, and the party seeking to continue the disputed position is made subject to such terms, including interest, as the Tribunal may impose at a later stage.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

6/7/2018 TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNALTELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHIDATED 28TH MAY, 2010Petition No. 155 (C) of 2010Tata Sky Limited … PetitionerVs.ESPN Software India Pvt. Ltd. … RespondentBEFORE:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.B. SINHA, CHAIRPERSONHON’BLE MR. G. D. GAIHA, MEMBERHON’BLE MR. P.K. RASTOGI, MEMBERFor Pe oner : Mr. Ramjisrinivasan, Sr. AdvocateMr. Gopal Jain, AdvocateMr. Kaushik Mishra, AdvocateMr. Ankur Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent : Mr. N. Ganpathy, Senior Advocate

O R D E R

P.K. Rastogi, Member Admit. Mr. N. Ganpathy accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. Reply may be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

2. Respondent had issued a notice to the petitioner demanding the amount of subscription to be paid for the period June 2008 to September 2008 and also an outstanding payment on account of short payment due to non-compliance of 7% price increase in subscription amount from 1st January, 2009 onwards. As a result of which amount of Rs.2,86,85,407/- has been due for the period 1st January, 2009 to 31st March, 2010. A public notice was also issued on 21.5.2010 for deactivation of ESPN channels through Tata Sky.

3. The Petitioner has submitted that the amount for the four months period i.e. June, 2008 to September, 2008 has already been paid in terms of the order of this Tribunal.

4. Regarding 7% increase in the subscription amount for the period 1st January, 2009 onwards, we are of the opinion that hearing of this matter including passing of an ad-interim order may await the recommendations of the TRAI in view of the fact that the TRAI has undertaken to submit its recommendations before the Supreme Court of India by 30.6.2010. In the meantime, the status quo may be maintained without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.

5. This order, however, shall be subject to the condition that the petitioner at an appropriate stage of the proceedings may be put to such terms including payment of interest etc., as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper. ……………......, J

Sinha) Chairperson

………….. (G.D. Gaiha) Member

……………...... (P. K. Rastogi) Member

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free