Mahalaxmi Cable Network vs Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (zeel)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the major issue

raised by the respondent on the basis of audit report dated 23.11.2020 by Ernst & Young is contained in paragraph 5.VI of the additional affidavit of

respondent filed on 26.11.2020. According to him, the variance of 106 subscriber count in the CAS and SMS as well as the allegation that 96 VCs

were not reported to ZEEL is based on an error committed by the Auditor in not taking note of the member of deactivated STBs. According to

learned counsel, had that been done, there would have been no such variance reported by the Auditor.

Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has referred to inner page 3 (running page -24 of additional affidavit) of the affiliate audit

report and has emphasised that as per the last bullet point critical data items not available for review were as many on 4 different counts. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that the Regulations or the Audit Manual do not require that such data which has been pointed out as critical data

made has to be available for review. According to learned counsel, the auditor is in error. It appears that the petitioner is blaming the auditor for

various comments and reports against the petitioner. It would be necessary in such circumstance to permit the petitioner to point out in specific and

précise terms the errors or lapses allegedly committed by the Auditor. This should be communicated to the auditor through mail and letter at the

earliest and preferably by tomorrow. The Auditor should give a suitable reply and point out whether the stand of the petitioner communicated

through the mail or letter is justified or not. Such reply should point out the relevant provisions in the Regulations or the Audit Manual which may

help this Tribunal in deciding the issue raised by the petitioner. The Auditor is requested to send his reply to the petitioner as well as to the

respondent within one week from today. The petitioner should send a copy of its mail/letter to the other side also so that both the parties are aware of

the issue on the next date.

Post the matter under the same head on 18.01.2021.

The prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to call upon the Auditor as an expert to address the issue through Video Conferencing will be considered

on the next date, if required.