Framework necessary as TRAI responsible for protecting consumers’ interests: RS Sharma
The recommendation on data privacy which was issued yesterday rests on the fact that it is the user who generates the data. He should have the primary control of his or her own data and the rest of the players, the ecosystem are essentially custodians of that data. We started the consultations on 9 August, 2017. Justice Srikrishna Committee was formed on 31st or 30th of July last year. So more or less, both happened at the same time. During the process of consultation, we got huge amount of inputs and whatever comes out of it, whatever recommendations we make, they will go as an input to the Justice Srikrishna Committee. Secondly, we have divided the entire space in two parts; one is specific to the telecom sector. Another is the general issue of data protection. Justice Srikrishna Committee is expected to give their recommendation on those general issues.
Fight for Essar Steel: Arcelor to pay Uttam, KSS dues
ArcelorMittal, which is one of the two key contenders for the bankrupt Essar Steel, told the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on Wednesday that it will pay Rs 7,000-crore dues of Uttam Galva and KSS Petron in case the appellate tribunal finds its first round of bid to be ineligible. Currently, the company has transferred the amount into a State Bank of India escrow account. The submission regarding payment was made by ArcelorMittal’s counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi when the NCLAT bench headed by its chairman SJ Mukhopadhyay observed that the company may get an opportunity to “remove its stains” in the event its bid was found to be ineligible due to non-payment of dues. However, the bench said that for rival bidder Numetal such a chance was not available.
DoT demand: Idea, Vodafone may pay under protest
The $23-billion merger deal between Idea Cellular and Vodafone India may soon get the final nod from the department of telecommunications (DoT) as the companies are likely to pay the Rs 7,268 crore in dues towards spectrum charges demanded from the government. However, the companies are likely to pay the demand under protest, which means once the merger is approved by the DoT they will challenge the demand in court. Sources said that the companies have decided to first pay and then challenge rather than first contest the payment in court because the latter move would delay the merger.
Did Yes Bank flout Sebi rules in spat with UBS?
The markets regulator is examining a Yes Bank Ltd communication directing UBS Group AG’s Indian arm to drop coverage of the bank for potential violation of securities laws, three people directly aware of the development said. Yes Bank, in an email, asked UBS in the last week of June to drop coverage of the bank following a 21 May UBS research report on eight Indian banks for its clients which claimed that Yes Bank had the highest credit exposure to the troubled power sector. The private lender alleged that the Swiss firm and its equity analysts were “biased”, “motivated” and unrealistic in their research. Yes Bank also threatened the Swiss company with legal action for publishing reports based on the bank borrowers’ filings with the Registrar of Companies (RoC), unless UBS corrected the report according to data and a deadline chosen by Yes Bank.
Binani’s operational creditors optimistic after admission of claim
Binani Cement’s operational creditors, who moved the Supreme Court in April challenging various sections of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to claim parity with financial creditors, are now optimistic about recovering all dues. This follows the apex court clubbing this plea along with a petition by Sanjay Singal, chairman and managing director of Bhushan Power & Steel, who claimed certain sections of the IBC were ultra vires of certain parts of the Constitution. Although the two pleas are different, people with knowledge of the matter said they both point towards the legality of certain provisions in IBC, where a relook is needed if they violate provisions under the Constitution — a call only the Supreme Court can take.
About the Author
