Two Shapoorji Pallonji firms, who are the shareholders in Tata Sons, moved National Company Law Tribunal over Mistry’s removal and alleging “oppression” of minority shareholders and “mismanagement”.
In July 2018, NCLT dismissed the petition in July 2018 against which appeal was filed by Pallonji firms before the NCLAT. The NCLAT proceeded to overturn the NCLT order prompting the current appeals before the Supreme Court.
Tata Sons claimed in its petition that the NCLAT granted reliefs which were not prayed for by restoring Cyrus Mistry to his “original position” as the Executive Chairman of Tata Sons and declaring the appointment of Chandrasekaran the incumbent Executive Chairman of Tata Sons as illegal.
The plea highlighted that the tenure of Cyrus Mistry as the Chairman and Director of Tata Sons expired in March 2017 and a direction by the NCLAT to allow Mistry to continue as a functionary beyond the term would be contrary to the articles of association of the company and the established principles of company law.
Shapoorji Pallonji firms in their cross appeals contended that the NCLAT failed to give certain crucial reliefs to Mistry.
Source: Barandbench
