CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench

R Vijaykumar vs Sumangali Cable Vision And Anr

Telecom Disputes Settlement And Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 9 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 TDSAT CK 0036

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shiva Kirti Singh, Chairperson · Subodh Kumar Gupta, Member
CASE NUMBER
Broadcasting Petition No. 98 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

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

4 paragraphs · 167 words

Petition is admitted for hearing.  Since respondent no. 1 has appeared through Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, no notice need be issued upon respondent no. 1. Issue notice to respondent no. 2, dasti and email in addition. Rule is made returnable within four weeks.

Post the matter under the head "for directions" on 13.4.2022.

Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel has stated at the Bar that name of M/s SUMANGALI CABLE VISION, an MSO has been changed as M/s KAL CABLES. He has pointed to Annexure P-3 at page 28 in support of this fact. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to file an amended memo of parties showing the name of erstwhile M/s SUMANGALI CABLE VISION as M/s KAL CABLES. Let that be done within two days.  Notice shall be issued thereafter showing the respondent no. 1 as M/s KAL CABLES.

Mr. Ajay Kumar prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file reply and vakalatnama. Prayer for interim relief shall be considered on the next date.