##PAGE1##

1

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

Dated 30^th March 2026 Broadcasting Petition No. 553 OF 2021

DEN Networks Limited ….Petitioner Versus

Bacchu Cable Network …..Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM KRISHANA GAUTAM, MEMBER

For Petitioner : Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Aashi Arora, Advocate

For Respondent : None

JUDGEMENT

1. The present Petition, under Section 14, read with Section 14A of the

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (As amended from time to time) (hereinafter referred to as “TRAI Act”) has been filed on behalf of the above Petitioner Company, against the Respondent, a

2

Local Cable Operator, Bacchu Cable Network, bearing LCO code 1287370979 in the Petitioner’s system, for direction to the Respondent, to return total 107 Set Top Boxes, in good and working condition, which has been issued to Respondent, or in lieu of the same, pay a total amount of Rs.2,13,893/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Three Only), @ 1999/- per set top box. Petitioner also requested the Tribunal to pass such orders, as it may deem fit and appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in favour of the Petitioner, and against the Respondent,

alongwith cost of the Petition, in accordance with law.

2. In brief, it was contented that the Petitioner is a cable television

service provider, duly registered under the provision of the Cable television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “Cable Television Act”). The Petitioner is carrying on Distributor Platform Operator [herein referred as “DPO”] business. The Respondent, is a Local cable operator (LCO), and has been receiving encrypted Cable signal feeds of television channels from the addressable system of the Petitioner, to retransmit the same through its cable television network to the subscribers. The Respondent has

3

entered into a Model Interconnect Agreement on 31^st August 2020 (herein after referred to as “Agreement”) with petition for obtaining Cable signal feed. Copy of the agreement dated 31.08.2020, is

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-P1 to the Petition.

3. It has been submitted that Respondent has migrated to the

competitor DPO of the Petitioner, without giving any notice & complying with the TRAI regulations. It has been mentioned in the Petition that these above 107 STBs are the exclusive property of the Petitioner and has been mentioned in the Agreement, executed between the Parties. The Petitioner stated that the Respondent has taken undue advantage of the Petitioner. It is stated that on the basis of the terms of written agreement, executed between the parties, Set Top Boxes were supplied to respondent. Inventory details of STBs is

Annexure-P2 to the petition.

4. Petitioner has discharged its obligation under the said agreement, but

Respondent has failed and neglected to perform its obligations and migrated to the network of rival DPO, without complying the provisions of TRAI Regulations. Respondent has defaulted in meeting

4

its obligations, as laid down under the agreement. Hence, a cause of action arose on 11.06.2021, when petitioner issued a cease and desist notice to respondent. A copy of that notice issued by the Petitioner Company is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-P3 to the

petition.

5. Hence, the Petitioner, has filed this petition, through Mr. Siddharth

Priya Srivastava, Manager, who is duly authorised to file this petition, vide Board Resolution, which is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-P4 to the petition, for appropriate directions in the interest

of justice.

6. The Tribunal has the jurisdiction to entertain and try the present

petition under the provisions of the TRAI Act, and it has been field

within the limitation period.

7. It has been contented that on many occasions, the Petitioner orally

requested the Respondent to refrain from swapping of STBs, but respondent migrated to rival DPO, without returning STBs, which are exclus