Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1. These appeals have been filed under Section 14(b) of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as TRAI Act) challenging the notifications dated 24.8.2006 and dated 31.8.2006 issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (for short TRAI). The impugned notification dated 24.8.2006 amends the Interconnection Regulations dated 10.12.2004. By virtue of the amendment, the broadcasters get 45% share in the revenue while Multi System Operators (MSOs for short) and Local Cable Operators (LCOs for short) get the balance 55%. Further, a standard Interconnect Agreement has been provided for, which is to operate if the parties fail to arrive at interconnect agreement mutually within the stipulated period.By the impugned notification dated 31.8.2006, the TRAI has prescribed a maximum retail price of Rs. 5/- per pay channel per month per subscriber.2. The appellant in Appeal No. 10(C) of 2006 (SET Discovery Pvt Ltd) claims to be a company engaged in the bu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
M.M. Kumar, CJ: 1. The petitioner is an Advocate of this Court and has apparent interest to ensure that public authorities act in accordance with the Constitution and law. Her endeavor to achieve general welfare of the people through implementation of various provisions of Statutes has been brought to forefront by filing numerous Public Interest Litigations. 2. The present Public Interest Litigation is inspired by the activities of the cable operators for digitalization of Cable Television Services. According to the allegations made in various paras of the petition, the cable operators are misusing the newly added Section 4A of the Cable Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 ( for brevity the Act) by forcing their subscribers to switch over to Cable Digitalization by purchasing a Set-top box which is priced at Rs.1200/-. The amount of Rs. 500/- is to be deposited in advance by March 15, 2013. The balance amount is to be paid at the time of installation of Set-top box. In that regard, relianc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT
S.B. Sinha The petitioner is a Multi Service Operator. It entered into a subscription agreement with the respondents for obtaining supply of signal its channels in Toopran, Ramayampet and Chegunta villages. An agreement was entered into by and between the parties hereto on or about 9.6.2010 for the period 1.1.2010 and 31.12.2010. Annexure B appended to the said agreement apart from mentioning the aforementioned villages postulated the area of operation to be “As per Annexure-1”. The petitioner has annexed a list of subscribers which are at of the paper book containing the names of Mandals and Villages within which the subscription agreement is said to be operating. The respondent, however, contends that Annexure-1 to the agreement is not what has been projected to be at the aforementioned pages and the same was to be containing the details of the LCOs operating in the said villages. The petitioner by a letter dated 21.7.2010, however, expressed its intention to extend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:- 01.10.2009 Coram:- The Honble Mr. Justice R.REGUPATHI Crl.O.P. Nos.33757, 33881, 34416, 10367, 10524 & 10536/05, 4699, 7496, 7765, 17258, 150 & 720 of 2006 & Crl.R.C. No.710/2006 and Miscellaneous Petition Nos.9552 of 2005 etc. Crl.O.P. No.33757 of 2005 1. A.M. Rathinam 2. Perarasu 3. Actor Vijai Petitioners Vs. S. Sellapandian, B.A. B.L., Advocate. Respondent Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in C.C. No.1100 of 2005, on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Thiruthuraipoondi, and quash the same. For petitioners : Mr.V.Bhiman, for M/s.Sampathkumar Associates. For respondents : Mr.S.Prabakaran COMMON JUDGMENT Alleging opprobrious visual artistic work designed against lawyers and legal profession in a Tamil movie called Sivakasi, pocketful private complaints came to be filed against the Producer, Director and Actor of the movie before various Judicial Magistrate Courts in the State and to qu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [2006]4CompCas401(Delhi); 128(2006)DLT180; 2006(92)DRJ258
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. In this writ petition it has been prayed that a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued for implementing the transmission/retransmission of pay channels only through an addressable system in the specified areas of Mumbai, Kolkata and the National Capital Territory of Delhi in accordance with the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995; that the actions or omission on the part of Respondent No.1 in not implementing the provisions of Section 4A of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 be declared as patently illegal, mala fide and arbitrary in nature; that the Respondent No.1 be directed to take necessary steps directing the respective State Governments to make available necessary resources for the implementation of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995; that Respondent No.2 be directed to take necessary steps to implement the above said prayers. It has also been prayed that in the alternative, damages be aw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 146(2008)DLT455
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. In Petition No. I (CW 24105/2005) Star India Pvt. Ltd. has prayed for a certiorari quashing the proviso to Section 2(1)(k) of the TRAI Act; a certiorari for quashing Tariff Orders dated 15.1.2004, 1.10.2004, 1.12.2004 and 29.11.2005 and the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulation, 2004 It has further been prayed that the Court should declare that TRAI is not competent to regulate broadcasting services as also another declaration to the effect that these impugned Orders and impugned Interconnect Regulations are vocative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(a) and (g) as also Articles 301 to 307 of the Constitution. In Petition No. II (CW 5332/2006) Star India Private Limited has prayed for the setting aside an order of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 12(C) of 2005 titled Grahak Hitvardhani Sarvajanik Sanstha v. TRAI and (b) issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the Telecommunication (Broadcasting an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to Direct the R4 to R22 to telecast/publish the clippings and videos showing the assault on innocent lawyers vide Annex-A and B.)Per Ajit J. Gunjal J.,1. An unsavory incident which took place on 2nd of March 2012 has resulted in a spate of writ petitions being filed before this Court seeking various reliefs including one for a direction to the State Government to entrust the Investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short ‘CBI’). Various reliefs were sought for in the said writ petitions including a direction to some of the respondents, who are electronic media houses to telecast the clippings and videos showing the assault on innocent lawyers and also a direction to the Union of India to initiate action against Media for telecasting/publishing false information in the electronic and print media against the Advocates and for host of other reliefs.2. Bef...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10732-10733 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.4574-4575 OF2015 UNION OF INDIA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10734-10735 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [PRASAR BHARATI VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET NOS.4572-4573 OF2015 IN INDIA & ORS. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10736-10737 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [HOME CABLE NETWORK PVT. LTD. VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR NOS.12743-12744 OF2016 CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10738-10739 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.419-420 OF2017 [SOPAN FOUNDATION VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. 1 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.Leave granted in all the Special Leave 1. Petitions. The precise origin of the game of 2. cricket, though largely unknown, has been traced, at least, to late 15t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10732-10733 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.4574-4575 OF2015 UNION OF INDIA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10734-10735 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [PRASAR BHARATI VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET NOS.4572-4573 OF2015 IN INDIA & ORS. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10736-10737 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [HOME CABLE NETWORK PVT. LTD. VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR NOS.12743-12744 OF2016 CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10738-10739 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.419-420 OF2017 [SOPAN FOUNDATION VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. 1 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.Leave granted in all the Special Leave 1. Petitions. The precise origin of the game of 2. cricket, though largely unknown, has been traced, at least, to late 15t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10732-10733 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.4574-4575 OF2015 UNION OF INDIA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10734-10735 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [PRASAR BHARATI VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET NOS.4572-4573 OF2015 IN INDIA & ORS. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10736-10737 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) [HOME CABLE NETWORK PVT. LTD. VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR NOS.12743-12744 OF2016 CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(S) 10738-10739 OF2017[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.419-420 OF2017 [SOPAN FOUNDATION VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.]. 1 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.Leave granted in all the Special Leave 1. Petitions. The precise origin of the game of 2. cricket, though largely unknown, has been traced, at least, to late 15t...
Tag this Judgment!