The Supreme Court last week dismissed two appeals moved by telecom companies, Bharti Cellular Ltd and Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd challenging the rulings against them by the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). In the case of Bharti, which held licence for the Delhi metro area, the company accepted the terms of the migration package. Later, it raised disputes over the method of computation of subscribers, interest on the licence fee and imposition of penal interest on the fee. The court upheld the findings of the tribunal. It also dismissed the appeal of Sistema company stating that once the terms of the migration package was accepted, the company cannot “approbate and reprobate”, or go back from what was agreed upon.
‘Authorities not obliged to hand over documents on FEMA against firm’
The Supreme Court last week stated that the adjudicating authorities under the Foreign Exchange Management Act and Rules are not bound to furnish all documents in their possession to the person to whom they issue show cause notice. Only those documents they rely on are required to be shown to the person under notice. The authorities can refuse to supply other documents, the court stated in the case, Kanwar Natwar Singh vs Director of Enforcement. The complaint against Singh was that he and another person acquired foreign exchange in respect of two oil contracts with Somo of Iraq. They transferred the amount to certain parties through Jordan National Bank without the permission of the Reserve Bank of India. When they received the notice, they demanded 83,000 documents related to the case. The authorities were not willing to part with all of them except those which were relevant. It decided to hold inquiry. This was challenged by the businessmen, but the court rejected their pleas stating that the demand was “obviously to obstruct the proceedings.”
Declare all consignment for transit to claim insurance
When the insurance policy for transit of goods insists on declaration of ‘each and every consignment’, failure to comply with it would result in rejection of the claim by the insurer, the Supreme Court stated last week while dismissing the appeal case, Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills vs United India Insurance Co. A huge consignment of oil tins from Jaipur to Agartala was damaged in a rail accident. The surveyors found that it contained more than that was declared. So the insurance company rejected the claim, arguing that it was against the terms of the cover note. Though the mill was successful in the Rajasthan consumer commission, the national commission and the Supreme Court justified the stand of the insurance company and dismissed its appeal.
Arbitration of dispute with Korean firm to be in Korea
The Supreme Court last week dismissed the petition of Dozco India Ltd seeking arbitration of disputes with South Korean firm Doosan Infracore Ltd in India under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The court pointed out that the terms of the agreement between the Korean firm, which manufactures excavators and other heavy equipment, and the Indian firm for distribution of the machinery contained a clear clause that arbitration would be in Seoul under the Korean law.
Appeal against modified rate of interest dismissed
The Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal of Punjab & Sind Bank against the judgement of the Delhi high court which had modified the rate of interest ordered by the debt recovery tribunal for payment of dues by Allied Beverage Company. In the proceedings against the company initiated by the bank the tribunal ordered payment of interest at the rate of 18 per cent with monthly rests. The high court reduced the rate of interest to 14 per cent with annual rests as the revival of company was under progress. Both parties appealed to the Supreme Court. It dismissed both appeals. The company's demand for further reduction of interest was also rejected.
Challenge to transfer of probe against arlines dismissed
The Delhi high court last week dismissed two writ petitions moved by Interglobe Aviation Ltd and the Federation of Indian Airlines challenging the transfer of the probe against them ordered by the erstwhile Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission to the Competition Commission. The high court ruled that all investigations and proceedings which were pending before the Director General of Investigation, MRTP Commission or taken up by the DG on its own under the MRTP Act, would stand transferred to the Competition Commission. The MRTP commission last year had referred a complaint against the airlines to its DG for investigation. The complaint was that they had collectively increased air fares and withdrawn the promotional fares as a result of which additional costs were imposed on the consumer and competition in the industry was reduced. The MRTP ordered an enquiry by its DG. Later, that commission was replaced by the Competition Commission. The airlines challenged the transfer of the investigation on a technical ground. It was dismissed.
Builder pulled up for abusing its dominant position
The Competition Commission of India has initiated investigation against DLF Ltd on a complaint of abuse of dominant position and passed interim orders restraining it from cancelling allotment of apartments in the Belaire residential complex in the DLF City, Gurgaon. The order was passed on a petition by Belaire Owners Association alleging that the company had misused its dominant position in the real estate market and compelled buyers of flats to agree to unreasonable and discriminatory conditions.
