TDSAT: Penalty upto Rs. 2 Lakh can be imposed for willful failure to comply with orders of Appellate Tribunal

Must Read

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Follow us

Brief Facts of the Case

The petitioner filed the present suit before Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal against the respondent on the ground that disconnection of supply of signals affected by the respondent MSO was without proper notice of 21 days contending the disconnection effected on 10.3.2019  to be illegal and unlawful. The court passed an interim order dated 18.3.2019, to resume the supply of signals however; the supply of signals was not resumed although reminders were sent through various emails and letters. It is the further case that even after the final order was passed by the Tribunal on 24.4.2019, the petitioner’s network was not activated and complaints made to the respondents had no effect. The petitioner received a disconnection notice sent by the respondent on24.6.2019 for non-payment of subscription fees for the period up to June 2019, on the basis of alleged subscription agreement dated 11.5.2019 to which the petitioner denied and stated that there was no resumption of supply of signals since 40.3.2015 nor there was any new agreement signed between the parties thereafter.

Arguments presented by the Parties

The respondent filed a reply to the suit on 25.9.2019 stating that the present application has been filed after an unexplained delay of about three and half months only to harass and malign the respondent. The respondent argued that Mr Shiv Kumar Verma as a representative of the petitioner approached the respondent through a letter dated 5.5.2019 which disclosed that Naveen Sharma, the proprietor of the Applicant was his partner and had been absconding due to filing of a criminal case and has requested for issuance of an alternate Login ID and Password and claimed that the respondent accepted the request of Shiv Kumar Verma treating the same as a request of the petitioner. According to the respondent, this trick has been played to deny the liability to pay for the dues mentioned in the subsequent disconnection notice. The respondent further prayed to dismiss the application with costs and to direct the petitioner to pay the subscription dues as given in the notice along with interest.

Decision of the Court

The respondent is directed to pay a penalty of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only)  to the registry under section 20 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRA) Act, 1997 Act for disobedience to comply with the degree of interim order passed by the Appellate Tribunal as the arguments presented by the respondent were vague and were not proved to be true.  In addition to this,  the respondent was directed to pay to the Applicant a sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand only) by way of compensation for the wrongs done to him along with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till date of ‘realization.

[googlepdf url=”https://libertatem.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/original-judgement-by-the-court_watermark.pdf” download=”Download Judgement PDF” width=”100%” height=”900″]


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -