Cyrus Mistry's SP Group Seeks Representation on Tata Sons Board; Shares 3 Letters Written by Ratan Tata
Cyrus Mistry, who represents the Shapoorji Pallonji, has filed a cross plea before the Supreme Court challenging an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and requested the apex court to grant proportionate representation to SP group on the board of Tata Sons. SP group is second largest stakeholder in Tata Sons with 18.7% stake.
 
Tata Sons had already filed a plea before the apex court against the NCLAT order. 
 
Seeking more relief from the NCLAT saying that the December 2019 order did not do full justice, the plea filed by Cyrus Investments Pvt Ltd and Sterling Investments Corp Pvt Ltd from the SP group says, "... the majority shareholders as indeed the company have by practice and conduct admitted to the right of the SP group companies to nominate directors on the board.
 
This is also consequential to the large shareholding of the SP group in Tata Sons, which is in excess of Rs1.5 lakh crore and therefore, on an equitable ground and in order to protect its interests, it is just that the SP group be allowed proportionate representation and thereby permitted to nominate such number of director on the board of directors of Tata Sons as may be in accordance with their equity shareholding, as any decision of Tata Sons affects its shareholding."
 
Mr Mistry also requested the apex court to delete article 121 of the Tata Sons that "enables select directors to override the views of entire board of directors or alternatively the requirement of an affirmative vote conferred on directors nominated under article 104B should be restricted to matters covered by article 121A and such rights be extended to the majority directors of SP group as appointed..."
 
Both the Tata Group and the Mistry side had challenged the December 2019 ruling of the NCLAT in the Supreme Court. In January this year, the apex court stayed the NCLAT order reinstating Cyrus Mistry as executive chairman of Tata Sons and restoring his directorships in the holding company as well as three group companies. 
 
In December last year, the NCLAT while reinstating Tata Sons' ousted chairman Mr Mistry, held that the appointment of N Chandrasekaran as his successor was illegal. The appeals court observed the haste in Mr Mistry's removal as chairman of the Tata group's holding company, and this action completely ignored the interest and oppression of minority shareholders.
 
Cyrus Mistry, a scion of the wealthy Shapoorji Pallonji family that owns a minority stake of 18.7% in Tata Sons, has been locked in a legal battle with Tata Sons and Tata family head Ratan Tata after he was unceremoniously ousted as the chairman in October 2016 in a coup. 
 
According to reports, Mr Tata and Mr Mistry had a fall out over key investment decision. Mr Mistry had taken over as the chairman in 2012 after Mr Tata announced his retirement.
 
The cross plea filed by the SP group says, "The absence of a nominee from the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) group of which the Mistry family are a part, on the board of Tata Sons conduct is prejudicial to the SP group whose stake in Tata Sons is valued at over Rs1.5 lakh crore."
 
"The removal as a director is also prejudicial inasmuch as Tata Sons is a two group companies where the ouster of management participation is contrary to the understanding and arrangement between the Tata group and SP group that led to nominees of the SP group being on the board of Tata Sons for 40 years," the plea contended.
 
On 26 June 1980, Pallonji Mistry, father of Cyrus Mistry was appointed as nominee director of SP group on the board of Tata Sons. He served as director of Tata Sons for 25 years till 15 December 2014. After this, Cyrus Mistry, who owns 50% stake in SP group, was a director of Tata Sons from 10 August 2006 till 6 February 2017. 
 
Mr Mistry contended that the NCLAT had correctly held that Tata Sons is a quasi-partnership between the Tata grop and SP group and material, like letters, show active consultation and engagement between the two groups.
 
The plea states that shareholding of Tata Sons is held by two major groups, the Tata group, including Tata Trusts, Tata operating companies and Tata family and the SP group. 
 
The plea mentions three letters written by Ratan Tata to Pallonji Mistry, first in March 1991, soon after Mr Tata became executive chairman of Tata sons, second letter was written in May 2004 and third in January 2005. 
 
The first letter says, "...Our common agreement and mutual faith will foster a true and lasing relationship without any misunderstanding- and in the best interest of Tata Sons as a company. Our standing together will also be a matter of strength...In ending, let me re-iterate that I will never do anything consciously to hurt you or your family..."
 
In the May 2004 letter, Mr Tata had requested Pallonji Mistry to continue as director of Tata Sons despite reaching the retirement age of 75 years. "In other words," the plea filed by Cyrus Mistry says, "an exception was made on the retirement policy in view of the personal relationship and in order to enable Mr Pallonji Mistry to continue as a director in view of impending initial public offering (IPO) of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (TCS), a critical time at which Mr Ratan Tata turned to Mr Pallonji Mistry, nominee of SP group, for guidance and counsel."
 
When Pallonji Mistry retired, in January 2005, Mr Tata in a letter acknowledged his association with the Tata group. Mr Tata in the letter was quoted as saying "Even though you are stepping down at this time, I will continue to keep you informed of the events in Tata sons, and I hope you will permit me, from time to time, to seek your counsel. It would also be my endeavour to keep both Shapoor (Mistry) and Cyrus (Mistry) informed of the affairs of Tata Sons in their capacity as shareholders. I have valued their respective contributions in the companies where they serve as directors and look forward to their continued involvement with the firm in the future."
 
However, Ratan Tata has rejected claims that his “personal letters of appreciation” to Pallonji Mistry, father of Cyrus Mistry, can be regarded as evidence of a quasi-partnership or any vested legal right in Tata Sons, says a report from Economic Times.
 
Quoting a person close to Mr Tata, the report says, "These letters cannot be called ‘commitment’ or ‘agreement’ after 15 years.”
 
Last Friday, while admitting the cross plea by SP group, the Supreme Court had asked both the parties to complete their pleadings within four weeks.
 
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User 

    COMMENTS

    Meenal Mamdani

    1 month ago

    That a venerable company like the Tatas should come to this is such a pity.

    For long Ratan Tata had been running the company as if it is a privately owned company and that he alone could make all the decisions. However, Tatas is a public company and must follow the rules and regulations that apply to such companies.

    Most of the Indian corporations are family owned and the so called independent directors do not exercise their independent judgement and always approve of what ever decisions the executive officer, who is always a family member, makes. If they don't then they are ousted.

    If Indian financial sector is to mature and gain a reputation for transparency and probity in the wider world stage, then it must be governed in a manner which is ethical. The regulatory bodies must act impartially to uphold the rules.

    Covid-hit MakeMyTrip lays off 350 employees, says no respite in sight
    Covid-hit online travel major MakeMyTrip has laid off nearly 350 employees as the pandemic has changed the context and viability of some of its business lines in its current form.
     
    The company is offering mediclaim coverage for the impacted individuals and their families till the end of the year.
     
    According to an internal letter from Founder Deep Kalra and CEO Rajesh Magow sent to employees, the impacted employees will also get leave, gratuity, retention of company laptops and outplacement support, apart from salary payments as per their notice periods.
     
    "It is undoubtedly the toughest decision we have had to take so far and it's the saddest day for us as an organization," read the letter.
     
    The company analysed Covid-19 impact closely and spent considerable time thinking about the path to business recovery. 
     
    "It is evident that the pandemic has changed the context and viability of some of our business lines in its current form. Keeping this in mind we have had to take this sad but inevitable decision of rightsizing our workforce in these businesses," said the duo.
     
    The staff rationalization, they said, is mapped to their future business strategy and "is in no way a reflection of the work done by people in these teams".
     
    According to Kalra, the word of travel has been ravaged due to global Covid-19 pandemic.
     
    "What's evident is that the impact of COVID-19 crisis is going to be long drawn for us. It's unclear when traveling will become a way of life, as it was pre-Covid," said the letter. 
     
    The tourism industry in India is staring at two crore job losses as industry insiders cite central apathy and a predictably long recovery period.
     
    Indian tourism travel and hospitality impacts 10-12 per cent of India's employment which covers almost 5 crore plus direct and indirect jobs.
     
    "We are living through extraordinary times which have impacted individuals, communities, businesses, countries and our world at a magnitude unknown before and there is no let-up in sight," said the MakeMyTrip executives.
     
    The Indian tourism, travel and hospitality sector has already seen over one quarter of accumulated losses which began from February onwards.
     
    Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • User 

    Delhi HC restrains Quikr, Olx from posting ads related to Reliance, Jio
    The Delhi High Court has granted Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) an interim injunction against Quikr and OLX India and restrained them from publishing any ads containing the name Reliance or Jio.
     
    In an order, Justice Mukta Gupta of the Delhi High Court in the plaint concerning Quikr said, "From the facts noted above the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case in its favour and in case no ad-interim injunction is granted the plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable loss."
     
    "The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs. Consequently, till the next date of hearing, defendant, its agents, servants, affiliates are also restrained from putting on their portal any advertisement containing the name/mark Jio and Reliance with its variations and/or any other mark, logo which is deceptively/confusingly similar to the plaintiffs' registered trademarks Jio and Reliance in terms of prayer (a) of para-55 of the application", the order said.
     
    According to the plaintiffs in the present suit, defendant a private limited company owns and operates www.quikr.com, a web portal engaged in publishing classified advertisements. Defendant's web portal enables consumers to publish advertisements for selling and offering goods and services for a consideration. Defendant's web portal also operates as an online recruitment website facilitating consumers to advertise job vacancies.
     
    The grievance of the plaintiffs is that at the defendant's web portal fake and fraudulent advertisements are available, which are luring innocent job seekers into fake and fraudulent assurance for jobs, besides infringing the plaintiffs' registered trademarks and trade names, that is, Jio and Reliance including in its variations.
     
    The plaintiffs along with the documents have filed material to show that two persons who have been lured by these advertisements, were enrolled on payment of fees and subsequently offered job letters. Later during investigation they found that the job letters issued were fake and thus they were constrained to file complaints.
     
    The counsel for the defendant, Quikr argued that the listings on the defendant's portal are automatic and in view of the large number of people listing their advertisements on the defendant's web portal and the system being auto generated, the defendant has no mechanism to ascertain the authenticity of the third parties and as and when any party lodges a complaint the defendant pulls down the said URL. He further stated that in view of the defendant's having informed that these two URLs posted on the defendant's website are fake, the defendant would immediately pull down the two URLs.
     
    In the Olx case, RIL had filed a similar plaint that the defendants, who are web portals, are causing immense harm and irreparable injury to the plaintiffs' goodwill and reputation as on the defendants' web portal fake and fraudulent recruitment advertisements are being published which are accessible under the various words i.e. Jio Jobs, Reliance Trends Jobs, etc. infringing the plaintiffs' trademark and trade name Jio and Reliance.
     
    The counsel of Olx said they have also added filters with the words Jio and Reliance so that in future nobody can misuse the platform of the defendants with these false and fictitious advertisement so as to defraud the job seekers and infringe the plaintiff's trademarks/trade names.
     
    "Considering the averments in the plaint and the application, the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case in their favour and in case no adinterim injunction is granted they would suffer an irreparable loss. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs. Consequently, an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in terms of prayer (a) as prayed for in para 57 of the application is granted", the order said.
     
    Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • User 

    We are listening!

    Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
      Loading...
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email

    BUY NOW

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)
    FREE: Your Complete Family Record Book
    Keep all the Personal and Financial Details of You & Your Family. In One Place So That`s Its Easy for Anyone to Find Anytime
    We promise not to share your email id with anyone