High CourtsDivision Bench(2018) 12 DEL CK 0040

Asianet Digital Network Pvt Ltd & Anr vs Star India Pvt Ltd

Delhi High Court · Decided on 5 December 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Menon, CJ · V. Kameswar Rao, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Letters Patent Appeal No. 677 Of 2018, Civil Miscellaneous Nos. 51131-51132 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 287 words

V. Kameswar Rao, J

CM No. 51131/2018 (for exemption)

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

LPA 677/2018

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the order dated November 19, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) 12337/2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

2.

The grievance of the appellants before the learned Single Judge was that, an order dated October 22, 2018 passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (in short 'TDSAT'), whereby the TDSAT has directed the application filed by the appellants to be placed at the time of final consideration. The appellants had filed the said application for production of an agreement entered into between the respondent and M/s K.C.C.L., who according to the appellants is one of its competitors. The respondent had taken a plea that the agreement is confidential, which the appellants dispute.

4.

According to the appellants and also contended by Mr. Jayant K. Mehta that the agreement is not confidential and the said issue has been well settled the Supreme Court. This submission is disputed by Mr. Rajiv Nayyar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent.

5.

During the course of his submissions, Mr. Mehta has contended that the information sought is required to be given much before the arguments are advanced so that the appellants can argue on the same.

6.

If that be so, liberty is with the appellants to file an appropriate application before the TDSAT in that regard and it goes without saying that the same shall be considered by the TDSAT in accordance with law.

7.

The appeal is dismissed.

CM No. 51132/2018

Dismissed as infructuous.