Kerala High Court
Star India Private Limited vs M/S.Asianet Satellite Communications ... on 30 December, 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2018 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1940
OP(C).No. 1952 of 2017
OS NO. 899/2017 OF THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S COURT
PETITIONER(S)/1ST DEFENDANT:-
STAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,
STAR HOUSE, URMI ESTATE,
95 GANPATRAO KADAM MARG,
LOWER PAREL (WEST),
MUMBAI - 400 013
BY ADVS.SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW
SRI.ARUN THOMAS
SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN
SRI.ALPHIN ANTONY
SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL
SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA
SMT.MARIA ROY
SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN
RESPONDENT(S)/PLANITIFFS & 2ND DEFENDANT:-:
1. M/S.ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE LEGAL,MR.M.RABI KRISHNA,
2A, II FLOOR,
LEELA INFOPARK, KAZHAKUTTAM.
2. M/S.ASIANET COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,
ASIANET COMPLEX, PULIYARAKONAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 573.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-07-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ACM
OP(C).No. 1952 of 2017 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
DATED 30.12.2015 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN PETITIONER
AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO HD
CHANNELS.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
DATED 31.12.2015 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN PETITIONER
AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO DAS PHASE
- III AREAS).
EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
DATED 31.12.2015 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN PETITIONER
AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO DAS PHASE
- IV AREAS).
EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24TH MARCH 2017
SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE BROADCASTING PETITION,
BEARING NO.95 OF 2017 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE HON'BLE TDSAT WITHOUT ANNEXURES.
EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31ST MARCH 2017 IN
BROADCASTING PETITION NO.95/2017.
EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF DISCONNECTION NOTICES DATED 26TH
APRIL 2017 (INCLUDING PUBLIC NOTICES) TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.05.2017 IN
M.A.NO.175 OF 2017 IN BROADCASTING PETITION
NO.95/2017.
EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPIES OF THE SCREEN-SHOTS EVIDENCING THAT
THE RESPONDENT NO.1 HAD PUBLISHED THE
AFORE-MENTIONED DEFAMATORY MESSAGE ON ITS
NETWORK.
EXHIBIT P10. TRUE COPIES OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICTING THAT
THE EMPLOYEES OF RESPONDENT NO.1 WERE PRESENT
IN LARGE NUMBERS ON BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11. TRUE COPY OF THE POLICE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12. TRUE COPY OF THE BROADCASTING PETITION BEARING
NO.211 OF 2017 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE
THE HON'BLE TDSAT WITHOUT ANNEXURES.
EXHIBIT P13. TRUE COPY OF THE BROADCASTING PETITION BEARING
NO.229 OF 2017 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
HON'BLE TDSAT WITHOUT ANNEXURES.
EXHIBIT P14. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.05.2017 IN
BROADCASTING PETITION NO.211 OF 2017 ISSUED BY
THE TDSAT.
ACM
OP(C).No. 1952 of 2017 (O)
EXHIBIT P15. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2017 IN
BROADCASTING PETITION NO.229 OF 2017 ISSUED BY
THE TDSAT.
EXHIBIT P16. TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.899 OF 2017 FILED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P17. TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION - I.A.
NO.3545 OF 2017 IN O.S.NO.899 OF 2017 FILED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P18. TRUE COPY OF THE EX PARTE ORDER DATED 15.06.2017
IN I.A.NO.3545 OF 2017 IN O.S.NO.899 OF 2017 OF THE
MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
ACM
K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH, J.
===========================
O.P.(CIVIL) No. 1952 of 2017
===========================
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2018
JUDGMENT
When the petition came up for hearing, the learned counsel for both the parties have submitted before this Court that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and a memorandum of settlement agreement entered into between them and in the light of the above settlement, O.S.No.899/2017 pending before Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram has been withdrawn. Hence, this petition has become infructuous.
2. It is made clear that, the legal question of jurisdiction to try the case is not concluded in this matter and kept obliged.
Sd/-
K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH, JUDGE ACM