STAR INDIA PVT LTD Vs. ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C) 7445/2006 Mindful of the fact that these proceedings do not partake of an appellate nature the facts require to be stated in brevity. Interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would be justified if the impugned Orders are shown to suffer from perversity, or have come to existence by an infraction of any of the principles of natural justice, or is unreasonable in the Wednesbury sense.

(2.) The parties had entered into an Agreement in the year 2003 on a monthly subscription fee of Rs.83.40 lacs and a subscriber base of 2.78 lacs. Disputes arose in respect of that contract which were eventually came before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). Petition No. 39(C) of 2004 was decided by detailed Orders dated 3.3.2006. TDSAT declined to interfere in the contractual terms upto 31.12.2003. For subsequent periods it was found that no contract had been executed; that Asianet Satellite Communications Pvt. Ltd.(ASIANET) kept insisting on reduction of subscriber base and consequent reduction in the monthly subscription. TDSAT has also opined that there was enough material before it to indicate that the principle of parity has not been adhered to by Star India Pvt. Ltd. (STAR) in relation to ASIANET vis-a-vis other cable operators in Kerala. It had further concluded that on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties the Universe of STAR subscribers in the category of `other cable operators' could not be as lowest as 2.75 lacs. TDSAT also observed that they were of the prima facie view that the subscriber base should be around 62000 to 81000 instead of 2.78 lacs. It also held that the burden of determining the subscription amount payable lay on STAR and this had to be determined by STAR based on the principle of parity with other cable operators in Kerala. TDSAT directed the parties to reconcile the accounts for the period 1.1.2003 to 31.12.2003 as per the terms of the written agreement for that period, and on such reconciliation adjustments were to be carried out for subsequent periods also. The dispute between the parties had been considered in all its complexities by TDSAT for the period prior to 1.5.2006. It cannot possibly be reasonably argued that TDSAT should have ignored all its previous proceedings while passing an interim order for the current period.

(3.) It will also be relevant to mention that in those earlier proceedings interim Orders had been passed by TDSAT directing ASIANET to pay monthly subscription at the rate of 55 lacs, as an ad hoc arrangement.