Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal

NAAPTOL ONLINE SHOPPING PRIVATE LIMITED vs PRASAR BHARATI & ANR. on 16 October 2026

TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

NEW DELHI

Dated:

16/10/2026

BROADCASTING PETITION/594/2021

Petitioner Name:

Naaptol Online Shopping Private Limited

Versus

Respondent Name: Prasar Bharati & Anr.

BEFORE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM, MEMBER

For Applicants/Appellants/

Petitioners Advocate

Mr Vibhav SrivastavaMs Payal KakraMs Tanya GuptaMr Pranav For Respondents Advocate Mr. Rajeev Sharma Sr. Adv., Ms. Shreya Sharma, Ms. Arunima Singh Mr Uddhyam Mukherjee Mr Nishant Kandpal

ORDER

1. Case taken up. Learned Counsel for both side are present.

Page 1 of 2

2. From the very perusal of order sheet of the Court No. 1, from where this petition has been made over to this Court No. 2, for hearing at the final hearing stage, reveals that there is neither issues framed, nor evidences led by the parties. Though one mentioning is with regard to fact that parties are not to lead their evidences. But, the pleading reveals that parties are at differences with regard to the facts, and for proving this fact, the evidences ought to be there. In the very first para of reply, the challenge is of maintainability of this petition, because the tender accepted was by Naaptol Online Shopping Private Limited. The agreement was with it. Whereas, the petition was got filed by some third entity Cinema 24X7 Private Limited, having no pivity with Prasar Bharati. Hence, this petition was not maintainable at this score itself. Subsequently, by way of Miscellaneous Application a request was made for making Naaptol Online Shopping Private Limited, as a Petitioner, because of result of merger/ amalgamation in the scheme of amalgamation, occurred after the four years of filing of this petition, and this was allowed by this Tribunal, wherein, the petitioner's name has been changed so. But, by changing this name, the challenge with regard to maintainability of the petition is not meted out.

3. In a Civil Adjudication, the rights and liberties are decided for the cause of action said to have arisen, compelling the filing of petition and on that cause of action day, there was no cause of action in favor of petitioner, Cinema 24X7 Private Limited, who had filed this petition. Hence, there is must for framing the issues, thenafter giving opportunity for leading evidences, then to hear argument for making decision.

4. The facts and circumstances of same are on record.

5. Matter is being referred

to Court of Registrar for framing of issues, taking of evidence etc. for ripening the file for hearing argument, by this Tribunal.

6. Parties to appear before Court of Registrar on 27.11.2026.

( JUSTICE RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM)MEMBER

/NC/

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead