Zee Telefilms Ltd & Anr v/s. Union of India & Others
- Bhawna Tuteja
- May 24, 2020
Content :
Zee Telefilms Ltd., a leading entertainment technology company with vertical digital media filed a writ against The Board of Control of Cricket (BCCI) for cessation of the contract dated 21.09.2004 awarding exclusive television rights for a four-year term.
Zee Telefilms Ltd., hereinafter called the First Petitioner and the Union of India is referred to as First Respondent. The Second Respondent to this issue, the BCCI is a society registered under the Act of Tamil Nadu Societies Registration, 1975 recognized by the Union of India, the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. The President and the Secretary of the Second Respondent are the Third and Fourth Respondents, respectively. The Fifth Respondent, “ESPN Star Sports” is a USA based partnership firm having subsidiary in Singapore, branded as “ESS”. The Sixth Respondent is a Chartered Accountant Firm which was named by the Board with respect to the tender on 07.08.2004. In the assistance of a notification welcoming bids for the award of elite TV rights for the time of four-year tender, various entertainment groups including the applicants and Fifth Respondent thus gave their offers. With the end goal of this issue, we would assume that both the Petitioner and said Respondent were found to be qualified. The First Petitioner offered a bid to the tune of USD 260,756,756.76 (equivalent to INR 12,060,000,000/- or USD 281,189,189.19 (equivalent to INR 13,005,000,000/-).
After holding dealings with the First Petitioner as likewise the Fifth Respondent, the Board chose to acknowledge the idea of the former; as per and in assistance whereof a total of INR 92.50 Crore equal to the USD 20 Million was kept in the State Bank of Travancore. In light of “Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Others” AIR 2005 SC a draft of purpose was sent by the board; the First Petitioner consented to comply with the terms of the offer subject to conditioned referenced in the same.
The Fifth Respondent in the interim, documented a writ request under the watchful eye of the Bombay High Court which was set apart as Writ Petition (L) No. 2462 of 2004. The gatherings thereto documented their sworn statements in the said continuance. In its affirmation, the Board advocated its activity in allowing the agreement for the First Petitioner. On 21.09.2004, the Board before beginning its contention expressed that it implied to have dropped the whole delicate procedure on the reason that no finished-up contract was reached between the parties as no letter of purpose had therefore been given. The First Petitioner, in any case, raised a conflict that such a finished-up contract had been formed. The Fifth Respondent, taking into account the announcements made by the advice for the Board, appealed to a court for withdrawal of the writ request, which was allowed. On 21.09.2004 itself, the Board ended the agreement of the First Petitioner.
