ADVERTISEMENT

Ratan Tata Says Supreme Court Judgment In Tata-Mistry Case Validation Of Tata Sons’ Ethics

Supreme Court verdict “reinforces the justice and fairness” displayed by India’s judiciary, said Tata Sons’ chairman emeritus.

Ratan Tata, chairman emeritus of Tata Sons Ltd., pauses during a forum in Tokyo. (Photographer: Kiyoshi Ota/Bloomberg)
Ratan Tata, chairman emeritus of Tata Sons Ltd., pauses during a forum in Tokyo. (Photographer: Kiyoshi Ota/Bloomberg)

The Supreme Court's ruling in favour of Tata Sons Pvt. in its years-long legal battle with Cyrus Mistry and entities "reinforces the justice and fairness" displayed by India's judiciary, according to Ratan Tata.

"The judgment upholding all the appeals of Tata Sons is a validation of the values and ethics that have always been guiding principles of the group," Tata Sons chairman emeritus said in a statement.

On Friday, the Supreme Court set aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal order that had reinstated Mistry as chairman of Tata Sons. All petitions by Tata Group are allowed and all petitions by Mistry Group dismissed, the three-judge top court bench, led by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, said while pronouncing the order.

This means Mistry’s assertion of oppression and mismanagement at Tata Sons did not succeed at the apex court.

Ratan Tata's full statement:

The case reached the Supreme Court in January 2020 and was heard in December. The arguments in the top court touched upon the principles of board independence; what would qualify as oppression of minority shareholders; the manner of removal of Mistry in 2016 as well as the conversion of Tata Sons from a public limited company to a private limited. The two sides also differed on the valuation of the Mistry shares in Tata Sons and the difference was to the tune of around Rs 1 lakh crore.

It all started in 2016, when Mistry was dismissed as chairman of Tata Sons, the group’s main holding company. He also lost his seat on the board despite his family’s 18.47% shareholding in the company. That prompted him to file a case of oppression and mismanagement against Tata Group which he lost in the National Company Law Tribunal but won in the NCLAT.