38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, October 02, 2022
Top Stories
Interviews Know The Law Book Reviews Videos
About Us Contact Us

Tata-Mistry Tussle: Cyrus Mistry Files An Appeal In Supreme Court

By Lawstreet News Network      Feb 20, 2020      0 Comments      1,507 Views
TataMistry Tussle Cyrus Mistry In Supreme Court

As reported on 17th February, 2020, Cyrus Mistry has filed an appeal in the Apex court. He believes that his family is entitled to more relief from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The 45 page petition that was filed before the Supreme Court on 14th February, 2020 said that the tribunal after having reviewed the records has clearly found the prejudicial conduct administered by Tata Sons. An order reinstating Cyrus as the Tata Sons chairman was stayed by the Court. After which he had moved the Apex court and sought removal of the anomalies in the NCLAT order. 

The family owns 18.37% stakehold, whose worth is over Rs. 1.5 lakh crores in Tata Sons and have filed a cross appeal in the court. (Cross appeal - an appeal made against certain aspects of the judgement).

On 25th January, 2020, a three judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sharad Arvind Bobde stayed the NCLAT order dated 18th December, 2019. The stay came on an appeal filed by the Tata Group. 

NCLAT termed the action of Registrar of companies to allow conversion of Tata sons into a private limited company as illegal. After the ruling Mistry put forth that he wants to only uphold corporate governance norms and protect the family's investment in the company. However, the tribunal "has erred in not granting vital reliefs, including proportionate representation on the board of Tata Sons, and striking down of certain provisions in the articles of association, which were the tools of oppression that enabled prejudicial conduct by the majority shareholder," it said.

The petition had further contended that the tribunal said it did not have the powers to alter the Articles of Association (AoA) despite the fact that it has termed the relationship between the Tata and Mistry family as a quasi partnership. The petition is to secure the deletion of specific provision in the AoAof Tata sons that have been clearly permitted by the special provisions that deal with the oppression of minority shareholders under the companies law. "Instead, what was sought was clearly intervention in the form of deletion of provisions in the Articles of Association, which is a measure specifically provided for in Section 242 of the Companies Act, 2013," it noted.

Since the early 1920's, the 154 year old Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Group has been increasing its ownership in the Tatas. 


Author - Dyuti Pandya 

Share this article:

Lawstreet News Network

Leave a feedback about this

Related Posts
View All




Lawstreet Advertisement

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email