Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

BEFORE THE TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT NEW DELHI

Miscellaneous Application No. of 2019


IN
Petition No. 189 (C) of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Power Grid Corporation of India Applicant/Petitioner

Versus

Wire and Wireless India Limited Respondents

INDEX

Sr. Particulars Page


No.

1. Application on behalf of the Applicant-Petitioner under Order XVI


Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking permission to
call witness

2.

3.

PETITIONER

Through

For Trust Legal, Advocates and Consultants


Ritwika Nanda, Petal Chandhok
& Gajendra Khichi
Counsels for Petitioner
E-23, Third floor, Jangpura Extension
New Delhi 110 014
Ph. 9711721923, 4560349

Date:

Place: New Delhi


BEFORE THE TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT NEW DELHI

Miscellaneous Application No. of 2019


IN
Petition No. 189 (C)of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Power Grid Corporation of India …. Applicant/Petitioner

Versus

Wire and Wireless India Limited ... Respondents

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS UNDER ORDER XVI


RULE 1(3) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 SEEKING PERMISSION
OF THIS HON’BLE TRIBUNAL TO ADD A NEW WITNESS

The Applicant/Petitioner most respectfully submits as under:

1. The instant Application is being filed by the Respondent under Order XVI Rule 1(3)

of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 inter alia seeking leave of this Hon’ble Tribunal

to add a new witness

2. The instant application is being signed, verified and filed by Mr. V. Suresh Kumar,

authorized Representative of the Petitioner company and duly authorised vide the

Board Resolution dated 29.01.2019 to institute and/or defend any legal and

regulatory proceedings including civil and criminal where the company may be in

any way concerned.

3. The Respondent humbly submits that they had issued purchase order dated

19.12.2011, whereby bandwidth services were required to be provided by the

petitioner for the Delhi/Noida- Jaipur sector. Despite glaring omissions on part of

the petitioner, the respondent issued further purchase order concerning different

sectors of Indore-Bhopal-Jabalpur on 04.09.2012. The petitioner did not comply

with the material terms and conditions, the respondents made various complaints

to the petitioner about the same, but the petitioner did not take any course of action
and as a result of which the respondent had to suffer huge business losses in all units

of Central region and Jaipur DAS notified areas.

4. Keeping in view the long terms business plans that have been finalised as per

assurances and commitments given by the petitioner of the he respondent have

already made a huge investments. The petitioner had been blatantly omitting in

complying with the material obligations which he was obliged to upon the terms of

the purchase order.

5. The respondents issued the purchase orders on account of the timelines of the

Ministry of Information and Technology for the purpose of transition from the

analog mode to digital mode, any default on part of the respondent would attract

the wrath of the regulator as also the provisions of the cable TV network

(Regulations) Act. Thus the respondent had no option but to continue issuing

purchase orders upon the petitioner one after another despite there being brazen and

consistent defaults attributable to the petitioner.

6. The respondent have made known to the petitioner that the bandwidth services

made available by the petitioner consequent upon the purchase orders is not of the

requisite specifications as required to be calculated the up time of the bandwidth

services should be 99.5% on quarterly basis. It had been made clear by the

respondent to petitioner that the bandwidth services provided is deficient and did

not meet the requirement of SLA, where it has been stipulated that the up time

should be 99.5%.

7. Having regard to the emails of the respondent to the petitioner, it is quite evident

that the petitioner has become liable to compensate the respondent on account of

huge business and financial losses suffered by the respondent due to blatant and

gross omissions on part of petitioner.

8. As the issues involves opinions pertaining to services which includes specifications

not matching the requisite bandwidth, etc. The respondent seek the permission of

the court to add a new witness under Order XVI Rule 1(3) of the Civil Procedure

Code who is a skilled person, as the present matter involves issues which outside

the knowledge and experience of a lay man. Thus an opinion of a person with

technical knowledge will help the court understand the issues raised by respondent.
9. The Respondent further submits that it is imperative that the application be allowed

and the witness be allowed by the court to appear before the court.

10. The present application is bona fide and in the interests of justice and the Respondent

has no other alternate remedy.

PETITIONER

RESPONDENT

Through:

FOR TRUST LEGAL, ADVOCATES &


CONSULTANTS
Ritwika Nanda, Petal Chandhok
& Gajendra Khichi
Counsel for Respondent No. 2
Place: New Delhi C-224, Defence
Colony
Date: New Delhi
110024
Ph: +9711721923

VERIFICATION

Verified at New Delhi on this day of December 2018, that the contents of the
above Surrejoinder are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom and no part thereof is false. I say that the
contents of Paragraph ____ is based on personal knowledge, paragraph _____ are
on the basis of documents maintained in ordinary course of business and Paragraph
___ are on the basis of legal advice rendered to me.

RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT

Through:

FOR TRUST LEGAL, ADVOCATES & CONSULTANTS


Ritwika Nanda, Petal Chandhok
& Gajendra Khichi
Counsel for Respondent No. 2
Place: New Delhi C-224, Defence Colony
Date: New Delhi 110024
Ph: +9711721923

VERIFICATION

Verified at New Delhi on this day of 2019, that the contents of the
above Application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom and no part thereof is false. I say that the
contents of Paragraph ____ is based on personal knowledge, paragraph _____
are on the basis of documents maintained in ordinary course of business and
Paragraph ___ are on the basis of legal advice rendered to me.

RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT NEW DELHI

Miscellaneous Application No. of 2019


IN
Broadcasting Petition No. 390 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

SITI Networks Limited .... Applicant/Petitioner

Versus

M/s S S Cable Network and Anr. .... Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, V. Suresh Kumar S/o. Late Shri. V. V. Rao, aged about 49 years, residing at
C4F/180, Ground Floor, Janakpuri, New Delhi – 110059 and the Authorized
Representative of the Respondent Company having its office at Unit No. 38, 1st
floor, A wing, Madhu Industrial Estate, P.B. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400013, do
hereby solemnly declare as under:

1. That I am the Authorized Representative of the Applicant-Petitioner


Company and as such I am aware of the facts and circumstances of the
present case and competent and authorized to swear and depose this affidavit.

2. That I have read and understood the contents of the accompanying


Application and I say that the contents thereof are true to my knowledge as
derived from the official records and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.

3. That the contents of the accompanying Application may kindly be read as


part and parcel of the present Affidavit and the same are not being repeated
herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

Verified at New Delhi on this ____day of 2019, that the contents


of the paragraph no. 1 to 3 of above Affidavit are true to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.

DEPONENT