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
6 paragraphs · 225 wordsThis Broadcasting Petition is admitted.
Notice upon respondent. Ms. Kanupriya Gupta, accepts the notice on behalf of the respondent and seeking time to file Vakalatnama, to get instructions and to file reply. Time, as prayed for, is granted till the next date of hearing.
So far as ad-interim relief is concerned, it is argued out by the counsel for the petitioner at length and has submitted that petitioner’s infrastructure is being used by the respondent along with other persons as mentioned in paragraph-6 and 7 of the memo of the petition for distribution of the signals and, therefore, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that let respondent and its agent/distributor be restrained from sabotaging the network of the petitioner and cable wires, fiber etc. of the petitioner.
In view of this averments and also looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby restrain the respondent and its agent/distributor from using the network and infrastructure of the petitioner to supply its signals. We also restrain respondent and its agent/distributor from sabotaging the network of the petitioner. We hereby also restrain the respondent and its agent/distributor from cutting the cable wires, fiber etc. of the petitioner.
This ad-interim shall stand continue and operative till the next date of hearing.
This matter is adjourned to 23.4.2024.
