Thakur
Banned
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 14,856
- Reaction score
- 8,575
NEW DELHI:Taj Television has been directed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to restore with immediate effect the signals of Zee TV channels to Hathway Cable and Datacom,pending final hearing of the petition by the latter.
TDSAT Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and
member Kuldip Singh also directed Hathway as
an interim measure to make payment of the
monthly subscription fees from 1 April 2014
(in case of Kolkata and Digital Addressable
System - II areas) and from 1 May 2014 (in
case of Delhi and Mumbai) up to 31 July at the
rate of Rs 21.60 cost per subscriber basis.
The Tribunal has asked Taj to reply to the
petition filed by Hathway in three weeks and
asked Hathway to file a rejoinder if any, two
weeks thereafter.
Zee channels were earlier being distributed to
Hathway by Media Pro but the latter was not
in a position to renew the agreements in view
of the regulations issued by the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India around the same
time the earlier agreements came to end.
Thus, the Zee group of channels came to be
handled by Taj Television. But when
discussions between Hathway and Taj
Television for Zee TV channels failed to yield
any results, Taj TV on 26 June sent the RIO
based agreement executed from its side. There
was delay on the part of Hathway in executing
the RIO based agreement and in the
meanwhile, Taj Television issued the
disconnection notice under regulation 6.1 on 8
July 2014 and the public notice under
regulation 6.5 on 11 July 2014.
On 28 July 2014, Hathway counter-signed the
RIO based agreement and sent it back to Taj
Television. On the same day, Hathway also
sent a cheque dated 31 July for Rs 16.8
crore.
According to it, this amount was in full
payment of the arrears of the monthly
subscription fees for the period 1 April to 31
July 2014, calculated at the rate specified
under the fixed fee agreements with Media Pro
that had expired on 30 March and 30 April.
However, Taj did not accept the cheque and
sent it back and deactivated the signals on 31
July.
This led to the present petition by Hathway.
During arguments, Hathway maintained that
the RIO agreement can only come into effect
prospectively and for the past period it can
only be asked to make payment on the basis of
the fixed fee agreement with Media Pro and at
the rates as specified under the earlier
agreements.
The Tribunal has identified three main issues
for decision:
(i) Whether the RIO based agreement and the
rates prescribed under the RIO would apply
retrospectively from the date immediately
following the expiry of the earlier agreement
or prospectively from the date it was executed
by both sides?
(ii) Whether in the facts of this case, Hathway’s
liability to make payment on RIO rates would
arise from 26 June 2014 when the agreement
was signed by Taj Television and it was sent to
it for its counter signature?
(iii) What would be Hathway’s liability towards
payment of monthly subscription fee for the
period immediately following the expiry of the
earlier agreement and the date on which the
RIO agreement between the two sides came
into effect? http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/tdsat/tdsat-directs-taj-tv-to-restore-zee-signals-to-hathway-to-hear-msos-plea-late-next-month-140805
TDSAT Chairman Justice Aftab Alam and
member Kuldip Singh also directed Hathway as
an interim measure to make payment of the
monthly subscription fees from 1 April 2014
(in case of Kolkata and Digital Addressable
System - II areas) and from 1 May 2014 (in
case of Delhi and Mumbai) up to 31 July at the
rate of Rs 21.60 cost per subscriber basis.
The Tribunal has asked Taj to reply to the
petition filed by Hathway in three weeks and
asked Hathway to file a rejoinder if any, two
weeks thereafter.
Zee channels were earlier being distributed to
Hathway by Media Pro but the latter was not
in a position to renew the agreements in view
of the regulations issued by the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India around the same
time the earlier agreements came to end.
Thus, the Zee group of channels came to be
handled by Taj Television. But when
discussions between Hathway and Taj
Television for Zee TV channels failed to yield
any results, Taj TV on 26 June sent the RIO
based agreement executed from its side. There
was delay on the part of Hathway in executing
the RIO based agreement and in the
meanwhile, Taj Television issued the
disconnection notice under regulation 6.1 on 8
July 2014 and the public notice under
regulation 6.5 on 11 July 2014.
On 28 July 2014, Hathway counter-signed the
RIO based agreement and sent it back to Taj
Television. On the same day, Hathway also
sent a cheque dated 31 July for Rs 16.8
crore.
According to it, this amount was in full
payment of the arrears of the monthly
subscription fees for the period 1 April to 31
July 2014, calculated at the rate specified
under the fixed fee agreements with Media Pro
that had expired on 30 March and 30 April.
However, Taj did not accept the cheque and
sent it back and deactivated the signals on 31
July.
This led to the present petition by Hathway.
During arguments, Hathway maintained that
the RIO agreement can only come into effect
prospectively and for the past period it can
only be asked to make payment on the basis of
the fixed fee agreement with Media Pro and at
the rates as specified under the earlier
agreements.
The Tribunal has identified three main issues
for decision:
(i) Whether the RIO based agreement and the
rates prescribed under the RIO would apply
retrospectively from the date immediately
following the expiry of the earlier agreement
or prospectively from the date it was executed
by both sides?
(ii) Whether in the facts of this case, Hathway’s
liability to make payment on RIO rates would
arise from 26 June 2014 when the agreement
was signed by Taj Television and it was sent to
it for its counter signature?
(iii) What would be Hathway’s liability towards
payment of monthly subscription fee for the
period immediately following the expiry of the
earlier agreement and the date on which the
RIO agreement between the two sides came
into effect? http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/tdsat/tdsat-directs-taj-tv-to-restore-zee-signals-to-hathway-to-hear-msos-plea-late-next-month-140805
