AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Advocate, who has appeared for the respondent on advance notice.
The nature of grievance raised in this petition is one which cannot be directed to be redressed because of relevant provisions in the Interconnect Regulations which must conform to the agreement also. It is not in dispute that agreements and the Regulations direct or permit right to redistribute TV signals by a cable operator in any specified territory, but such right is always non exclusive. The rival LCO of the petitioner cannot be retrained either directly or through respondent from having a right to redistribute TV signals in the same area.
This Tribunal finds no merit in the petition. This petition is accordingly, dismissed.
It is noted that instead of sharing an old agreement of 2019, the respondent has shared with the petitioner an agreement of 14.7.2021 about which a dispute has been raised on behalf of the petitioner but that is not relevant to the present petition. There is no dispute that the right to redistribute signals has to be and is non-exclusive.