HATHWAY CABLE & DATACOM PVT Vs. BANJARA TELELINKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed by the Defendant Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC?) seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground of maintainability in view of Sections 14 and 15 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (TRAI Act?).

(2.) THE suit against the Defendant is for the recovery of Rs. 1,12,31,517/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of default together with costs. The Plaintiff is stated to be a Cable TV Service Provider, as is known in the cable TV industry parlance as a Multi Systems Operator (MSO?). The Plaintiff receives and distributes/redistributes satellite television, broadcast signals and other audio visual signals of cable TV channels to various end subscribers directly or through its distributors, franchisees, local cable operators etc. The Defendant is also engaged in the business of cable TV networks and is operating as an MSO in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The Plaintiff was appointed as the Distributor for SET Discovery Private Limited Bouquet of Channels popularly known as Sony Bouquet of channels with effect from 1st January 2003 for the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secundrabad. As a result anyone desiring to transmit or retransmit the signals of the said Sony Bouquet of Channels in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secundrabad were required to enter into an arrangement/understanding or agreement with the Plaintiff for such transmission/retransmission of the Sony Bouquet of channels. Likewise the Plaintiff was appointed with effect from 15th January 2003 as the Distributor for the Star (India) Private Limited for their bouquet of channels.

(3.) THE Defendant filed the present application on 22nd November 2006 stating the in view of Sections 14 and 15 TRAI Act this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Inter alia it is contended by the Defendant that the present suit is a dispute between two service providers as contemplated under Section 14 TRAI Act and any dispute between two more service providers has to be adjudicated only by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT?). Further under Section 15 TRAI Act, no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter which the TDSAT is empowered to determine under the TRAI Act. It is pointed out that under Section 2 (1)(k) TRAI Act the expression "telecommunication service" has been defined to mean service of any description which is made available to users by means of any transmission or reception of signs, signals etc. but "shall not include broadcasting services." Further the proviso to Section 2(1)(k) states that the Central Government may notify any other service including broadcasting services to be a telecommunication service. In terms of the proviso a notification was issued by the Central Government on 9th January 2004 whereby all disputes pertaining to cable TV services have been included within the purview of the TRAI Act. This notification dated 9th January 2004 stands further amended on 4th September 2006. Consequently the services provided by the Plaintiff and the Defendant would also be covered under the TRAI Act.