AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 288 wordsDraft Issues have been filed on behalf of the Petitioner. Mr. Himanshu Dhawan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the Respondents submits that he intends not to file any draft Issues and, thus, a prayer that the Issues be settled today itself.
Heard the parties and perused the record of the case, and in the light of the pleadings and material available on record of the case, the following Issues are settled:
ISSUES
i. Whether the instant petition is maintainable in its present form ?
ii. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a decree for the amounts claimed in their respective petitions towards outstanding subscription charges ?
iii. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a decree by way of recovery of STBs from the Respondents or in the alternative cost of such STBs and viewing cards from the Respondents as claimed in their respective petitions along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date the amount became due and payable till its actual realization ?
iv. Whether the Respondents have used the equipment of Petitioner to run / carry digital cable TV signals in contravention of TRAI Regulations and, thus, liable to be returned from illegal swapping ?
v. Whether the Respondent No.2, a competing MSO, is providing signals to Respondent No.1 in contravention of the TRAI Regulations ?
vi. To what other relief / reliefs the Petitioner is entitled to ?
Four weeks time is prayed and allowed to the Petitioner to file their evidence affidavits along with list of witnesses as prayed for. The Respondents may file their evidence affidavits along with list of witnesses, if any, within four weeks thereafter. Let the matter be listed for "Directions" on 18th July, 2023.
