Comments
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Tuesday refused to grant a stay on Tata Sons’ move to oust Cyrus Mistry as its Director through an extraordinary general meeting on February 6.
Mistry’s counsel, CA Sundaram, refused to argue the main petition filed on December 20, 2016, despite repeated requests of the Bench, and insisted that the tribunal must first pass orders on the issue of maintainability or give a decision on the waiver application.
Mistry’s camp has filed three petitions. The main plea is to challenge Mistry’s ouster as Chairman. The two other petitions are for staying the Tata Sons EGM on Feb 6 and seeking a waiver of Section 244 of the Companies Act under which only those who own more than 10 per cent stake can appeal at the NCLT.
The main plea was filed by two of Mistry’s family-owned firms — Cyrus Investments and Sterling Investment Corporation — on December 20, 2016.
On Monday, a two-member NCLT Bench decided to hear an adjournment plea by Mistry’s counsel, and acceded to the request. The tribunal will now hear Mistry’s counsel’s argument on February 13 and 14; in case the petitioner fails to argue, the petition would be dismissed.
Following the argument, the respondents (Tata Sons) can counter it on February 21 and 22, the division Bench comprising BSV Prasad Kumar (Member-Judicial) and V Nallasenapathy (Member-Technical) said. Tata Sons was represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi.
Speaking to media outside the court, Sundaram said: “The Bench made it clear that they are not deciding on the issue of maintainability at this juncture separately, but will only decide with the main matter. Our whole grievance today was really that it hasn’t yet been decided because it was left open, and we felt that should be decided first. That is exactly what we put forward to the Bench. The Bench has made it clear that they are not going to pass any orders at this juncture regarding the meeting on February 6.”
A lawyer close to Tatas said: “The NCLT has strongly reprimanded the petitioners, terming their refusal to argue today as disobedience. Today’s NCLT proceedings established the unprecedented and frivolous nature of the petition filed by Cyrus Mistry, that he has no case to argue and that all his allegations are towards a personal vendetta to try and damage the Tata brand.”
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.