TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI
DATED 28TH NOVEMBER,2008
PETITION No.243(C) OF 2008
Sun Direct TV Private Ltd. … Petitioner
Versus
Neo Sports Broadcaster Pvt. Ltd. …Respondent
BEFORE:
HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR,CHAIRPERSON
HON’BLE DR. J. S. SARMA, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR.G. D. GAIHA, MEMBER
ORDER
On the last date of hearing, this matter was adjourned for today to enable the parties to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. Today when the matter was taken up, at the outset, learned counsel for the parties submitted that all the issues between the parties have been sorted out, except one. It appears that thereafter the stand has changed and there is disagreement between the parties on various issues.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Tribunal may have to go into the validity of some of the conditions imposed by the respondent in its RIO. But this may take some time. The petitioner is keen to get the supply of signals immediately. The stand of the learned counsel for the respondent, however, is that neither there is a formal request in terms of Regulation 3.2 from the petitioner for supply of signals nor there is a formal agreement between the parties for supply of signals and without this, the respondent cannot be directed to start supply of signals to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to file reply to the petition. We find from the record that negotiations for supply of signals have been going on between the parties for quite some time. But there has been no settlement so far.
Let the respondent file its reply within ten days. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within one wee.
List for hearing on 18.12.08.
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI
DATED 28TH NOVEMBER,2008
PETITION No.243(C) OF 2008
Sun Direct TV Private Ltd. … Petitioner
Versus
Neo Sports Broadcaster Pvt. Ltd. …Respondent
BEFORE:
HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR,CHAIRPERSON
HON’BLE DR. J. S. SARMA, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR.G. D. GAIHA, MEMBER
ORDER
On the last date of hearing, this matter was adjourned for today to enable the parties to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. Today when the matter was taken up, at the outset, learned counsel for the parties submitted that all the issues between the parties have been sorted out, except one. It appears that thereafter the stand has changed and there is disagreement between the parties on various issues.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Tribunal may have to go into the validity of some of the conditions imposed by the respondent in its RIO. But this may take some time. The petitioner is keen to get the supply of signals immediately. The stand of the learned counsel for the respondent, however, is that neither there is a formal request in terms of Regulation 3.2 from the petitioner for supply of signals nor there is a formal agreement between the parties for supply of signals and without this, the respondent cannot be directed to start supply of signals to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to file reply to the petition. We find from the record that negotiations for supply of signals have been going on between the parties for quite some time. But there has been no settlement so far.
Let the respondent file its reply within ten days. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within one wee.
List for hearing on 18.12.08.
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
