Indian Bare Acts

Search Alphabatically :

THE CABLE TELEVISION NETWORKS (REGULATION) Act 1995

Title : THE CABLE TELEVISION NETWORKS (REGULATION) Act 1995

Year : 1995



3*[If any authorised officer has reason to believe that the provisions of section 3, section 4A, section 5, section 6, section 8, section 9 or section 10 have been or are being contravened by any cable operator, he may seize the equipment being used by such cable operator for operating the cable television network:

Provided that the seizure of equipment in case of contravention of sections 5 and 6 shall be limited to the programming service provided on the channel generated at the level of the cable operator.]
  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1.  Substituted by Act 36 of 2000, section 6 for sub-section (1) (w.e.f. 1-9-2000).

2. Words "Section 3" Substituted by Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2002 (2 of 2003)

3. Substituted by the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2011 (Act No. 21 of 2011) w.e.f. 25.10.2011.

1[(1) If any authorised officer has reason to believe that the provisions of 2[sections 3, 4A], 5, 6 or 8 have been or are being contravened by any cable operator, he may seize the equipment being used by such cable operator for operating the cable television network.]

(2) No such equipment shall be retained by the authorised officer for a period exceeding ten days from the date of its seizure unless the approval of the District Judge, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such seizure has been made, has been obtained for such retention.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The equipment seized under sub-section (1) of section 11 shall be liable to confiscation unless the cable operator from whom the equipment has been seized registers himself as a cable operator under section 4 within a period of thirty days from the date of seizure of the said equipment.



No seizure or confiscation of equipment referred to in section 11 or section 12 shall prevent the infliction of any punishment to which the person affected thereby is liable under the provisions of this Act.



(1) No order adjudicating confiscation of the equipment referred to in section 12 shall be made unless the cable operator has been given a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on which it is proposed to confiscate such equipment and giving him a reasonable opportunity of making a representation in writing, within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the confiscation and if he so desires of being heard in the matter:

Provided that where no such notice is given within a period of ten days from the days of the seizure of the equipment, such equipment shall be returned after the expiry of that period to the cable operator from whose possession it was seized.

(2) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (1), the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) shall, so far as may be, apply to every proceeding referred to in sub-section (1).



(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision of the court adjudicating a confiscation of the equipment may prefer an appeal to the court to which an appeal lies from the decision of such court.

(2) The appellate Court may, after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard, pass such order as it thinks fit confirming, modifying or revising the decision appealed against or may send back the case with such directions as it may thinks fit for a fresh decision or adjudication, as the case may be, after taking additional evidence if necessary.

(3) No further appeal shall lie against the order of the court made under subsection (2).

Last updated on July, 2016

Find a Lawyer

Legal Hall of Fame

The current Legal Luminaries of India, the credible names in the legal circle along with those who would be the leading stars of the next decade. These are some of the reliable names in field of law. Nominate the Legal Stars of tomorrow

More

Recent Judgment


Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra( R.F.A 299 of 2014

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra (R.F.A 299 of 2014)has ruled that a woman has a right over the property of her husband but she cannot claim a right to live in the house of her parents-in-law

More

Bare Acts

Helpline Law provides a user friendly compendium of Indian Law & Bare Acts. Get a complete list & detail of Indian Bare Acts, with amendments and repeals. It comes with easy-to-use features like Search by bare acts & by year. You can even email the information to yourself!

More

Have a Legal Matter ?
Need a Lawyer?

Have a Legal Matter ?

Need a Lawyer?

Male
Female