CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench

Union Of India vs Kamyab Television Pvt Ltd

Telecom Disputes Settlement And Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 10 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 TDSAT CK 0019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ram Krishna Gautam, Member
CASE NUMBER
Broadcasting Petition No. 368 Of 2017, 33 Of 2019
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 180 words

BP No. 368 of 2017

1.

Learned counsel for respondent mentioned that he has received the amended pleadings on today and he needs two weeks' time for replication.

2.

Nothing new is there. The amended pleading is in compliance of order of this Court, which was passed in the presence of counsel for both side. The pleadings had already been exchanged. Evidence are there and arguments are to heard.  No ground for any time for any replication, is there.   This request is being denied.

3.

Let arguments be advanced.

4.

Heard  learned counsel for both side at length in Broadcasting Petition No. 368 of 2017.  Reserved for Judgement.

BP No. 33 of 2019

1.

Learned Counsel for Petitioner mentioned that the liability was admitted in BP No. 368 of 2017, because of which a partial decree was passed and drawn by this Tribunal, for which an Execution Application is pending. The relief claimed in this subsequent Petition, had become almost infructuous. The same argument stand for this Petition too. Hence, this is to be also decided along with above Judgment.