Television vs Veena Cable Network on 21 October, 2010
H
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA-9.
FIRST APPEAL No.66/2009.
DECIDED ... present dispute relates to two service providers, i.e. Veena Cable
Network and Taj Television (India) Private Limited (Ten Sports) and is not
between
established
in 1985 and its code being duly recognized under the Cable
Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Rules
made thereunder, committed
Road,Kochi Ernakulam Kerala ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. T A Ayoob City Cable Vision,City Plaza,R S Road,Palakkad Palakkad Kerala ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE ... customer of the opposite parties and was running a cable television network. While so, the complainant on 1.4.09 registered a request for availing roaming services
affidavit in evidence. There is recital in affidavit
that as per Cable Television Network Regulations Act 1995
amended in 2011 digitization of cable network
with the
opposite party no.2, against the rules provided in Cable Television Network Act. Opposite party no.2
does not have right ... party no.2, who is not a registered cable operator, which is against the Cable
Television Networks (Regulation Act 1995), so the complainant lost
fnukad 04-09-2012 dks dkV fn;k gSA The
Cable Television networks (regulation) Act, 1995 dh /kkjk 8 ds
vuqlkj ;g izko
cable operator and has provided cable connections in
the various houses of the locality. M/s
Transex Cable Network was the over all incharge ... cable connection to the television. He should have sufficient knowledge,
experience and skill before doing such work.
The staff of the cable network
relevant for disposal of the appeal are that the complainants
obtained cable network connection to their house from the opposite parties ... electric conductors and cable wire. The opposite parties no.1 and 2 had not
followed the provisions of the television network regulation
individual who is / was the subscriber of the television channels of
respondent No. 2 - a cable operator (opposite party no. 4 of the complaint ... opposite parties
and was viewing the T.V. channels through the cable network being run by
the opposite party No. 1 - appellant. The opposite party
Broadband Pariseva Ltd. 86, Golaghata Road, Kolkata - 700 048. 2. B B Cable Network 20A, Sura 3rd Lane, Kolkata - 700 010, P.S. - Beliaghata. ...........Respondent ... Opposite Party No.2 as Local Cable Operator (LCO) under Network Service of OP No.1 GTPL, Kolkata Cable and Broadband Pariseva Ltd. as Multi
