Back
2014 Supreme(Online)(TDSAT) 13
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MR. AFTAB ALAM, CJ, MR. KULDIP SINGH, J
Sri Muthumari Cable Vision – Appellant
Versus
Sun 18 Media Services South Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Petition No. 178 (C) of 2011
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Jayant K.Mehta, Mr. Sukant Vikram
For the Respondents: Mr. Abhishek Malhotra, Mr. Nittin Bhatia
Claims related to overpayment of subscription fees must rest on clear contractual evidence, as conduct may reveal coercion and conflicting agreements.
Headnote:(A) Interconnect Regulations - Claim for over-payment of subscription charges due to arbitrary increase in rates challenged - Claims of agreements and derivatives thereof contested by both parties; the conduct of the parties analyzed. (Paras 3, 4, 17)
(B) Contractual obligations and enforcement - The validity of claims for payments depend on clear agreements and behavior of the parties suggests possible coercion - Claim seen as an afterthought. (Paras 6, 17) Facts of the Case: A cable distributor claimed an overpayment due to increased subscription fees that he had not agreed to, alongside claims of coercion regarding network mergers and agreements not being honored. Findings of the Court: The evidence pointed towards the inconsistency of the petitioner’s claims and the existence of prior agreements and actions that diminished credibility.
Issues: The main issues include the enforcement of contract terms under Interconnect Regulations and the legitimacy of the alleged increase in subscription fees.
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal highlighted that claims made in disputes must be substantiated with clear and credible evidence - established payments and agreements should guide findings.
Result: Petition dismissed with no order as to costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim of over-payment due to sudden increased subscription fees. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. analysis of contractual obligations and evidence of coercion. (Para 6 , 7 , 13 , 15) |
| 3. disputes regarding merger and agreements between parties. (Para 9 , 11 , 12 , 16) |
| 4. final court findings and dismissal of petition. (Para 17) |
ORDER
Kuldip Singh
In the present petition, an amount of Rs.29,52,872/- is claimed from the respondent no.1 on account of over-payment of subscription charges. The prayers made in the petition relating to the signals of respondent no.1 are not pressed during arguments as the petitioner has stopped taking the signals of this respondent.
2. The petitioner is a proprietorship concern of Mr. R. Kamaraj and is engaged in distribution of cable TV signals in Pappanadu Village in Thanjavur district of Tamilnadu. Respondent No.1 is the distributor of Sun Group of channels. The petitioner was taking the signals of Sun TV and K TV from respondent No.1 with effect from the year 2006.
3. The summary of the petitioner’s case is as under :-
(i) It has made an over-payment of an amount of Rs.29,71,865/- [figure corrected during evidence as Rs. 29,52,872] to the respondent No.1. In support of its claim, it has annexed a statement of accounts at pages 25-28 of the Paper Book.
(ii) There was a sudden and arbitrary increase in the subscription charges from Rs.56,672.18, the monthly subscription charges invoiced for January 2011, to Rs.3,01,287.19 which has been invoiced in the month of February and March, 2011. The petitioner received two invoices on 19.3.2011 for the months of February 2011 and March 2011 both for an amount of Rs. 3,01,287.19 each. This amount was never agreed to by the petitioner.
(iii) When the petitioner approached respondent No.1 for seeking credit for the said [overpaid] amount, respondent no. 1, illegally and dishonestly, issued notices on 10.3.2011 and 11.3.2011 under clauses 4.1 and 4.3 of the Interconnect Regulations on the ground that it has not come forward to renew the agreement that expired on 31.3.2010.
4. As per the invoices (pages 18-24 of the Paper Book) the petitioner was being charged Rs.55,584.58 per month as subscription till 06.12.2010. Further as per invoice dated 06.12.2010, there was total outstanding dues of Rs.57,338.324 in addition to the outstanding dues of Rs.25,642.13 towards Sun Distribution Services (SDS), predecessor-in- interest of respondent no.1. As per the invoice dated 06.01.2011, the subscription amount for the month of January 2011 increased to Rs.56,672.18 However, the total outstanding dues went up to Rs.7,96,118.32 Further, the outstanding dues of SDS payable to the respondent no. 1 also went up to Rs.12,54,155.15. The monthly subscription for the months of February 2011 and March 2011 further went up to Rs.3,01,287.19 per month. to transfer their outstanding amounts to the account of the petitioner.
5. Respondent No.1 in its reply has denied that the petitioner has made any over-payment and in support has annexed the statement of accounts (pages 106-109 of the Paper Book) as per which, after giving due credit for all the payments, there is a net outstanding of Rs.17,31,255.41 as on 22.8.2011. As per it, it has entered into an agreement with the petitioner for the financial year 2009-10, as per which the petitioner was to pay monthly subscription amount of Rs.55,584/-. However, the petitioner was indulging in piracy of signals of respondent no.1 and was unauthorizedly collecting money for the areas where it had no authorization to supply signals. The parties had a meeting on 19.11.2009 wherein the petitioner agreed to declare its correct area of operation by 25.11.2009. The petitioner further made a part payment of Rs.2.5 lakhs to respondent no.1 against the total outstanding amount payable by the petitioner. In support of its contention, a copy of the minutes of meeting dated 19.11.2009 is exhibited as Exb. R1W1/1.
6. Respondent no. 1 further submitted that the pet
