Madurai Krishna Network Pvt. Ltd. vs Thamizhaga Cable Tv Communication Pvt. Ltd.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent at length on all the relevant issues. The petitioner wants its three

channels (FTA) to be placed on the platform of the respondent MSO and redistributed as per RIO. The denial of such request by the respondent

has not been communicated to the petitioner in writing but in the reply, the respondent has taken two clear defences.

Firstly, respondent claims that the petitioner had a business relationship with the respondent earlier and he is a defaulter. Secondly, it is contended

that respondent's channel carrying capacity is totally filled up and in absence of any spare capacity, he is not obliged to carry the channels of the

petitioner in view of Regulation 4(7) of the Interconnection Regulations 2017( the Regulations).

During arguments, it has been pointed out by learned counsel for the respondent that even if the petitioner is not a defaulter, he can not be granted the

main prayer which is for an agreement for all his three channels in the ""Basic Service Tier Package"". He has further submitted that petitioner will

also be required to deposit by way of security the carriage charges for three months for each of his three channels if he opts for being carried on

Ala'carte mode.

Since the parties have been heard in detail on all the relevant issues, this Tribunal is required to pass a final judgement on all the issues, but learned

counsel for the petitioner prays for, and is granted another opportunity to seek instructions whether the petitioner is prepared to change its prayer

because as per provisions in the Regulations as a broadcaster, the petitioner may not be entitled to seek placement in any particular package. He may

also seek instructions with regard to requirements to deposit security. If required, petitioner may file affidavit or MA for changing its prayer to the

extent indicated above.

So far as the respondent is concerned, its defence that it has no spare channel capacity on its distribution network must not be based only upon its

channel capacity etc. in the month of February 2021 when the sur-rejoinder was filed containing several charts and facts relating to channel capacity

but relevant data after petitioner's request made on 28.8.2020 needs to be disclosed to demonstrate that the plea of non availability of spare channel

capacity is genuine and denial on this plea is on non - discriminatory basis. If so advised, respondent may file an affidavit relevant to this aspect of

its second defence.

The Parties may be ready with their stand and may file their affidavits/MAs within two weeks.

Put up for further hearing under the same head on 8.4.2021.

It is clarified that hearing is required only on the aspects on which parties have been permitted to file affidavits / MAs.