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 · 257 wordsHaving heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and looking to the contentious issues raised in this petition, notice upon respondent. Mr. Sudanshu Prakash accepts notice for the respondent and is seeking time to file Vakalatnama, to get instructions and to file reply.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner has insisted for ad-interim relief as prayed for in paragraph-25 of the memo of this petition. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that no notice has been given by the respondent neither to the petitioner nor to the down-stream subscribers and without giving any notice, the respondent has discontinued all the channels of the petitioner (except Asianet channel).
It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that there are gross violations by the respondent of the Interconnection Regulations, 2017 as mentioned in the memo of this petition, especially regulation 10(21) of the Interconnection Regulations, 2017 and there is also a violation of an agreement between the parties to this litigation [Subscription Licence Agreement dated 22.02.2023 (Annexure p-3 of the memo of this petition)]
In view of the aforesaid facts, as an ex-parte ad-interim relief, we hereby direct the respondent to immediately restore the signals of Star channels to its subscribers in terms of the Subscription Licence Agreement dated 22.02.2023 (Annexure p-3 to the memo of this petition). This restoration of signals Star channels shall be carried out within 24 hours. This ex-parte ad-interim relief shall remain operative till the next date of hearing.
List the matter under the same heading on 12.05.2023.
Order Dasti.