Siti Networks Ltd vs Roshan Cable Network And Anr

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant and learned counsel for the non-applicant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out findings which are mainly in the nature of findings of law in paragraph-3 and paragraph-8 of the

order under review and she submits that those findings may not be appropriate in the facts of another case and, therefore, for reconsidering the legal

implication of various provisions under Regulation 4(11) of the Regulations of 2017, this application be admitted and heard.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent points out that neither there is any mistake pointed out on facts appearing from the records nor

there is any error of law in recording the relevant findings. According to him, the finding that no LCO can be deprived of signals by an MSO unless

it is qualified on account of a contract or any provision having force of law such as the interconnect regulations, provides sufficient scope in the facts

of an appropriate case to argue that any provision in the inter-connect Regulations including those under Regulation 4(11) create a right in any

particular MSO to take note of alleged default in payment to another MSO and adjudicate the same himself to deny signals.

The findings do not suffer from any error of law and the issues are not sufficient for being entertained in a Review Application.

Review Application is accordingly dismissed. The law can be further settled in any appropriate case depending upon the facts of that case.