Cyrus Mistry Says He Had No Conflict Of Interest At Tata Sons

The war of words between Ratan Tata and Cyrus Mistry flared up again seven months after Mistry was removed as the chairman of Tata Sons Ltd., leading to a messy boardroom and legal battle.

In a recent interview to the Hindu newspaper, Ratan Tata, chairman emeritus of the Tata Group, said that Mistry was removed due to a conflict of interest and other issues such as poor governance and “a tendency to concentrate control”.

Mistry hit back saying that this is yet another attempt to obscure the truth and build a negative public narrative in a media trial against him which started back in October 2016.

A wealth of material placed on record before the National Company Law Tribunal, including e-mails, board documents and handwritten notes from Ratan Tata and other Tata Trust trustees would “clearly belie” Tata’s assertions, said an emailed statement from Mistry’s office.

Mistry clarified that after taking over as chairman, he voluntarily disclosed all the transactions between the Tata Group and the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, which is run by the Mistry family, despite not being legally required to do so. The statement said that he also pushed for setting up an independent committee with three members, all to be nominated by Tata Trusts, to review any related-party transaction.

Also Read: Did The NCLT Want A Trial Before The Trial In The Tata-Mistry Case?

Sharpoorji Pallonji Group’s revenue from Tata contracts declined from Rs 1,200 crore in 2013, when Mistry took over, to almost zero in 2016, the statement read. “Mr Mistry was fully disengaged from the functioning of the SP Group, devoting his entire time and attention to the Tata Group,” it added.

Tata Sons had not replied to BloombergQuint’s emailed queries at the time of publishing this report.

Here’s the full statement released by Cyrus Mistry’s office, a copy of which was obtained by BloombergQuint...