Authority: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 05 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corporation Ltd (JTCL) (Appellant) vs. Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd (Asianet) (Respondent) in three related civil appeals (Diary No. 16455/2026, Diary No. 70934/2025, and Appeal No. 4690/2026).
  • Origin: All appeals stem from Broadcasting Petition (B.P.) No. 391/2016 filed by Asianet before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) under Section 14 and 14A of the TRAI Act, 1997.
  • TDSAT Order (09‑08‑2023): Partially allowed Asianet’s claim, directing JTCL to deposit Rs 1,05,68,330 as principal, plus pendente‑lite and future simple interest at 9% p.a. until actual payment.
  • Review Applications: Both parties filed reviews under Section 16(2)(f) of the TRAI Act; Asianet’s Review (R.A. No. 7/2023) and JTCL’s Review (R.A. No. 10/2023) were dismissed by TDSAT on 20‑02‑2026.
  • Appeals: JTCL filed Civil Appeal Diary No. 16455/2026 challenging the 09‑08‑2023 and 20‑02‑2026 orders; Asianet filed Diary No. 70934/2025 and Appeal No. 4690/2026 challenging the same orders. Both sets of appeals were beyond limitation but condoned by the Court due to pending review.
  • Core Dispute: Asianet sought (i) recognition of pre‑suit/pre‑petition interest as per the agreement (18% p.a.) and (ii) award of interest at the contractual rate of 18% rather than the 9% awarded by TDSAT.
  • JTCL contested inclusion of service tax component and the quantum of principal.
  • Court Findings:
  • No error in TDSAT’s finding that Rs 1,05,68,330 is due as principal carriage fee.
  • Under prevailing jurisprudence (Central Bank of India v. Ravindra, I.K. Merchants Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan), tribunals may modulate interest rates when no statutory rate is prescribed.
  • The Court held that awarding interest at 9% is not arbitrary given current fiscal conditions; therefore, Asianet’s claim for 18% contractual rate was rejected.
  • Regarding pre‑suit/pre‑petition interest, the Court observed that clause 2.2 of the parties’ agreement mandates interest at 18% for delayed payments, and TDSAT had overlooked this component.
  • The Court directed TDSAT to assess pre‑suit/pre‑petition interest at 9% (the same rate as pendente‑lite/future interest) based on the date each installment became due, after giving both parties a fresh hearing.
  • TDSAT must complete this fresh exercise within four months of receipt of the order and may rely on existing charts or consider new submissions.

Final Outcome

  • Civil Appeal Diary No. 16455/2026 (JTCL) is dismissed.
  • Civil Appeal Diary No. 70934/2025 and Appeal No. 4690/2026 (Asianet) are disposed in terms of the Court’s directions.
  • TDSAT is ordered to recompute the pre‑suit/pre‑petition interest component at 9% p.a., hold a fresh hearing for both parties to submit interest computation charts, and determine the total decretal amount (principal + pre‑suit interest) within four months.
  • All pending applications, if any, are stood disposed.

Topics: Telecom Regulation, Interest Award