SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Online)(TDSAT) 47

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MR. AFTAB ALAM, CJ, MR. KULDIP SINGH, J
M/s Videocon Telecommunication Ltd. (Orissa) – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited – Respondent
Petition No. 10 of 2013 (M.A. No. 17 of 2013) | Petition No. 11 of 2013 (M.A. No. 18 of 2013) | Petition No. 12 of 2013 (M.A. Nos. 19, 406& 407 of 2013) | Petition No. 13 of 2013 (M.A. No. 20 of 2013) | Petition No. 14 of 2013 (M.A. Nos. 21, 408 & 409 of 2013) | Petition No. 15 of 2013 (M.A. No. 22 of 2013) | Petition No. 16 of 2013 (M.A. No. 23 of 2013) | Petition No. 344 of 2013 (With M.A. No. 261 of 2013) | Petition No. 345 of 2013 (With M.A. No. 262 of 2013) | Petition No. 137 of 2013



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Navin Chawla, Advocate, Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Advocate, Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advocate, Ms. Manvi Priya, Advocate
For Petitioner – SSTL (P.No.137/2013):Mr. Mansoor Ali Shoket, Advocate, Ms.Vibha Dhawan, Advocate
For Respondents:Ms. Maneesha Dhir, Advocate, Mr. K.P.S. Kohli, Advocate, Mr. Prashant Jain, Advocate, Ms. Neha Singh, Advocate

Court ruled that a binding contract may be inferred from conduct, reinforcing the notion that omission to sign does not negate acceptance of contractual terms.

Headnote:(A) Unified Access Services Licences - Interconnect Usage Charges - Telecom Regulatory Authority of India - Demand raised by BSNL on Videocon and Sistema for emergency calls beyond contractual terms - Both petitioners challenge the unilateral demands as exceeding permissible charges - The agreement terms were conditioned on mutual consent as per UAS Licences clauses defining emergency services. (Para 9, 10)

(B) Contract Law - Acceptance - The omission to execute the amended addenda by the petitioners does not negate the establishment of a binding contract as acceptance may be inferred from conduct and correspondence. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
Multiple petitions from telecom service providers challenging charges for Level-I emergency services as assessed by BSNL, claiming that demands were not aligned with their contractual agreements and raised incorrectly.

Findings of Court:
The demands made by BSNL were upheld, asserting that the contract terms regarding interconnect charges were binding and had been accepted through conduct despite lack of formal signatures on the amended addenda.

Issues: The primary issues were whether the unilateral demand for charges was contractually enforceable and whether omission to sign the addenda excluded the petitioners from liability.

Ratio Decidendi: Conduct and correspondence established implied acceptance of the terms in the amendment addenda, constituting a binding agreement wherein the petitioners were obligated to comply with the imposed charges.

Result: Petitions dismissed.

ORDER

By AftabAlam, Chairperson –

This batch of ten petitions challenges the demands made on M/s Videocon Telecommunications Limited, M/s Videocon Telecommunication Limited was earlier called M/s Datacom Solutions Pvt. Limited and in some of the documents pertaining to the case it is referred to by that name. But in the judgment it is referred by its current name, Videocon. and M/s Sistema Shyam Teleservices Limited, the two petitioners by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) of Interconnect Usage Charges (IUC) for emergency calls to public utility services (in telecom parlance, “Level-I services”). The demands are assailed on the plea that those are beyond the agreements entered into by the two sides and are based on the unilateral decision and internal circulars of one of the contracting parties, BSNL. Nine out of the ten petitions comprising the batch are filed by Videocon which relate to different service areas/circles. The remaining one petition (Petition no. 137 of 2013) is filed by Sistema. A tabular summary of the ten petitions is given below for the sake of convenience:

S.No.Name of the PetitionerPetition No.CircleDate of Invoice and Period of demandTotal Amount
1Videocon10 of 2013Orissa17.10.2012 (24.07.2010 – 31.03.2013)Rs.32,12,880/-
2Videocon11 of 2013U.P.East( (a) 11.09.2012 – (24.07.2010 – 23.07.2011) b) 11/09.2012 – (24.07.2011 – 31.03.2012) TotalR Rs.11,23,600/- s.8,50,989/-
Rs.19,74,589/-
3Videocon12 of 2013Maharashtra( (a) 18.07.2012 b) 30.08.2012 TotalR Rs.11,23,600/- s.21,70,887/-
R s.32,94,487/-
4Videocon13 of 2013Karnataka( (a) 24.08.2012 b) 05.09.2012 TotalR Rs.25,76,277/- s.7,63,586/-
R s.33,39,863/-
5Videocon14 of 2013Rajasthan06.09.2012(24.07.2010 – 31.03.2013)Rs.32,09,494/-
6Videocon15 of 2013Assam07.12.2012 (18.09.2010 – 31.03.2013)Rs.31,62,130/-
7Videocon16 of 2013Bihar13.12.2012Rs.23,28,776/-
8Videocon344 of 2013J&K08.01.2013(14.07.2010 – 31.03.2013)Rs.29,65,233/-
9Videocon345 of 2013North East17.12.2012(21.07.2010 – 18.01.2013)Rs.30,29,687/-
GRAND TOTALRs.2,65,17,139/-
10Sistema Shyam137 of 2013Delhi1 1 0 18.02.2013(25.07.2010 – 24.07.2011) 8.02.2013(25.07.2011 – 24.07.2012) 8.02.2013(25.07.2012 – 31.03.2013) 1.04.2013(01.04.2013 – 31.03.2014) GRAND TOTALR R R Rs.11,23,600/- s.12,35,960/- s.8,46,548/- s.13,59,556/-
R s.45,65,664/-

All the petitions arise from similar facts and raise the same questions of law.

Hence, all the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

During the period to which the demands relate, both Videocon and Sistema had Unified Access Services Licences for all the twenty two (22) service areas/circles in the country. Under the licence, the two petitioners, like all other holders of UAS licence, were mandated to provide for their mobile phone subscribers seam-less access to emergency public utility service, e.g., police, fire, ambulance etc. The relevant provision in this regard is contained in clause 29.1 of the UAS licence which is as under:

“29. Emergency and Public Utility Services:

29.1 The licensee shall provide independently or through mutually agreed commercial arrangements with other Service Providers all public utility services including TOLL FREE services such as police, fire, ambulance, railways/road/air accident enquiry, police control, disaster management etc. While providing emergency services such as police, fire, ambulance etc. it shall be ensured that such calls originated shall be delivered to the control room of the concerned authority for the area from where call is originated.”

(emphasis added)

It needs to be noted here that the countless police stations/control rooms, fire stations, health-care centres, accident enquiry centres and the disaster management centres all over the country are predominantly serviced by fixed lines. We can also take judicial notice of the fact that, for historical reasons, it is BSNL alone that is in position to effectively provide access to the fixed line telephones installed and managed by it at all the emergenc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top