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
20 paragraphs · 408 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent in light of further facts brought on record by the petitioner through M.A.
No. 46 of 2022.
In the impugned notice of disconnection dated 17.11.2021, the main grievance of the respondent was non supply of complete audit report covering the
period February 2019 till end of 2020. Subsequently, the said report and the necessary details have been brought on record by the petitioner alongwith
audit report dated 3.1.2021. It is clear from the said document and the submissions that petitioner did not accept the request of the respondent to have
an audit from February 2019. The Audit has been held instead from September 2019 which leaves the period from February 2019 to August 2019
uncovered by any audit. What will be the effect of such omission and whether it entitles the respondent to any claims may have to be examined in
the light of further stand of the respondent on the basis of the aforesaid audit report of 3.1.2021 and also a subsequent audit report dated 17.12.2021
which covers the period November 2020 to December 2021.
Respondent is always at liberty to raise a claim in accordance with law. At present, the issue is whether petitioner should be granted interim relief.
Pursuant to the impugned notice, respondent has disconnected its signals on 10.12.2021. Soon thereafter, petitioner shared the audit report on
17.12.2021. Some adverse observations were made by the respondent on 6.1.2022 which the petitioner forwarded to the auditor and their response
has also been shared with the respondent on 17.1.2022. Respondent's further observations in respect of the same are said to have been shared only
yesterday with the petitioner.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and after considering the audit report dated 17.12.2021 which shows the latest position in respect of
petitioner's system to be generally compliant with requirements of Schedule III of the Regulations, it is deemed just and proper to grant interim relief
to the petitioner by directing the respondent to resume supply of its signals to the petitioner forthwith, preferably within 24 hours. This shall be without
prejudice to any claim of the respondent which it may raise in accordance with law. The M.A and interim prayer are accordingly disposed of.
Respondent may file its reply / detailed reply, if, required, within four weeks. Rejoinder, if required, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Post the matter under the same head on 9.3.2022.Â
