S.PON PERUMAL Vs. N.VIJAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in both these writ petitions is common, they are taken up together for hearing and disposed of by way of this common order.

(2.) The petitioner in W.P.No.17803 of 2013 has laid challenge to the order dated 29.04.2013 passed by the third respondent and sought for a direction to issue fresh cable network license in the name of Sree Mutharamman Cable Network based on the application dated 15.02.2013.

(3.) The petitioner along with the husband of the fourth respondent - Natarajan, was carrying on the business in cable TV network by way of partnership agreement dated 29.11.2002 in the name of S.V.Cable Network. In the year 2012, there was a difference of opinion between the partners and the petitioner was kept away from the business and the said Natarajan obtained license in his individual name allowing his wife, who is the fourth respondent to be the proprietrix of the S.V. Cable Network without the knowledge of the third respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner started the cable network business and obtained an individual connection from KAL Cable Private Limited and was giving connections to certain areas in and around Thiruvalleeswarar Nagar, Chennai. The petitioner also obtained cable TV License from the third respondent in the same name, i.e., S.V. Cable TV Network and obtained fresh RC No.411, dated 15.06.2012. On knowing the same, the husband of the fourth respondent gave complaints against the petitioner through his wife. Based on the complaints, the third respondent conducted enquiry, wherein, it was mentioned that the license obtained by the fourth respondent was in the name of SV Cable Network, whereas, the petitioner's license was in the name of SV Cable TV Network and there was a difference in the names and therefore there were two different licenses. However, without verification, the third respondent cancelled the license of the petitioner on 25.07.2012.