TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI
Dated: 07/10/2026

E A/3/2019
IN
BROADCASTING PETITION/467/2016

Petitioner Name:    Discovery Communication India
Versus
Respondent Name:    Grand Vision

E A/4/2019
With
MISC APPLICATION/162/2020
IN
BROADCASTING PETITION/468/2016
Discovery Communication India ....Petitioner
Versus
Grand Vision ....Respondent
BEFORE
HON'BLE  MR. JUSTICE RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM, MEMBER
For Applicants/Appellants/
Petitioners Advocate
Ms. Payal Kakra,
Mr. Pranjal Singh
For Respondents Advocate None
ORDER

1. Case taken up. Learned Counsel for applicant is present.

2. The order sheet reveals that request was made to get the notice served over JD through Police Mode, and this Execution Application is pending at that stage. The file has been received from Court No. 1, wherefrom notice was got issued. But, in this Execution proceeding there is no provision for issuing a notice through Police mode or a warrant against JD. Rather, decree holder is to specify the mode, in which the decree is to be executed. The property of JD is to be specified, that may be attached and subsequently, auctioned for realisation of money in decree. The only opportunity of issuing a detention procedure is under Order XXI Rule 32 of Code of Civil Procedure, that too when, a request is being made and the expenses for taking steps, is being ascertained for issuing a civil warrant, that too whether to be issued through Police or through Advocate Commissioner or through the Civil Court Amin of the Court, having  jurisdiction in the area.

3. Hence, let this be got specified by decree holder as to which recourse is to be taken by this Executing Court and steps in that respect is to be taken first, within four weeks.

4. List the matter on 21.12.2026 “for further directions”.




( JUSTICE RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM)
MEMBER

/NC/