Tata Play vs Culver Max: TDSAT lets interim relief continue, final hearing in February 2026

The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) after refusing to recall its interim orders in the high-stakes broadcast dispute between Tata Play and Culver Max Entertainment in November, kept in place relief granted to the DTH operator against a ₹128.42-crore disconnection notice. On Thursday, tribunal listed the matter for final hearing in February 2026.

A bench comprising Justice Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, chairperson, and member Dr Sanjeev Banzal had dismissed Culver Max’s application seeking vacation of the interim stay granted to Tata Play, holding that no fresh grounds had been made out to revisit earlier orders passed in May and July 2025. The Tribunal said issues relating to reconciliation of accounts and alleged misstatements would be examined at the stage of final hearing.

Background to the dispute

The conflict dates back to May 2025, when Tata Play dropped 25 Culver Max channels from its direct-to-home (DTH) packs, citing contractual disagreements. Culver Max alleged that the move violated the interconnection agreement as well as TRAI regulations, triggering multiple proceedings before the TDSAT.

Culver Max had issued a disconnection notice on May 21, 2025, claiming outstanding subscription dues of ₹128.42 crore for services availed up to March 31, 2025. Tata Play challenged the notice, following which the Tribunal, in an interim order dated May 27, 2025, stayed the disconnection subject to Tata Play depositing ₹40 crore. The amount was paid on June 3, 2025.

In a subsequent order on May 30, 2025, the Tribunal also restrained Culver Max from disrupting services, noting Tata Play’s contention that all Sony channels remained available on an a la carte basis and that only Tata Play’s bouquet had been altered, not the broadcaster’s bouquet.

In its recall application (M.A. No. 481 of 2025), Culver Max argued that Tata Play had made “wilful and deliberate misstatements” to secure interim relief and that substantial admitted dues remained unpaid. Senior counsel Amit Sibal, appearing for Culver Max, placed a detailed chart before the Tribunal, pegging the total outstanding balance at ₹124.87 crore, including earlier dues and current subscription invoices up to October 2025.

According to Culver Max, even after accounting for payments received, tax deductions at source, and certain marketing adjustments claimed by Tata Play, a balance of over ₹63 crore remained unpaid as per the May 21 disconnection notice. It contended that the Tribunal’s interim protection should be vacated in light of these alleged defaults.

Tata Play, represented by senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Meet Malhotra, countered that the interim orders were effectively consent-based and had never been successfully challenged. They pointed out that Culver Max had earlier approached the Bombay High Court against the May 30 order but withdrew its writ petition in June 2025 without securing any relief.

Tata Play submitted its own payment reconciliation, stating that subscription invoices from October 2024 to September 2025 had largely been cleared, with several payments running into hundreds of crores made over the year. For months where disputes subsisted, the amounts were sub judice or linked to Tata Play’s counter-claims towards marketing and promotion fees, they argued.

The DTH operator also emphasised that invoices for June to September 2025 had been fully paid, while October 2025 dues were not yet payable under the agreement’s timelines. Any residual differences, Tata Play said, were typical in large-scale commercial relationships and should be resolved through reconciliation rather than by vacating interim protection.

Tribunal: no grounds to revisit earlier orders

In its order dated November 28, 2025, the Tribunal agreed with Tata Play, observing that its May 27, May 30 and July 16 orders had been passed after hearing both sides and with full participation of Culver Max’s counsel. The bench noted that the May 30 order had already been tested before the Bombay High Court and allowed to stand.

“Merely because the amount is due and payable, which is highly debatable and under challenge, there is no reason to recall or modify the interim orders,” the Tribunal held, adding that the “fine niceties of accounts” would be examined at the time of final adjudication.

Accordingly, Culver Max’s recall application was dismissed, and the main broadcasting petition has been listed for final hearing on February 13, 2026.

Parallel audit proceedings

Separately, the Tribunal is also seized of another dispute (Broadcasting Petition No. 362 of 2025) relating to a subscriber audit sought by Culver Max under Regulation 15(2) of the TRAI Interconnection Regulations, 2017.

After objections by Tata Play to the appointment of KPMG, Culver Max appointed another TRAI-empanelled auditor, MGB & Co. LLP. In an order dated September 17, 2025, the Tribunal laid down detailed safeguards on confidentiality, stressing that all subscriber data accessed during the audit must remain Tata Play’s property and be returned or irreversibly destroyed after completion of the exercise.

The Tribunal allowed the audit to proceed with strict confidentiality undertakings and directed that no commercially sensitive data be disclosed beyond what is legally necessary. On December 17, 2025, the TDSAT was informed that the audit process was ongoing, and the matter has now been adjourned to February 3, 2026.

With multiple petitions converging on issues of dues, channel distribution, and subscriber audits, the Tata Play–Culver Max dispute is shaping up as one of the most closely watched broadcaster–platform battles in recent years, with potential implications for interconnection agreements across the television distribution ecosystem.