Tata Vs Mistry: SP Group’s Reasons For A Review Petition

The March 26 verdict of the Supreme Court incorrectly interpreted company law provisions, diluting corporate governance standards and leaving large swathe of minority shareholders remediless, the Cyrus Mistry group has said in its review petition.

Last month, the Supreme Court had dismissed all allegations of oppression and mismanagement at Tata Sons Pvt. It overturned the verdict by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal that had directed the reinstatement of Mistry, scion of the SP Group, as executive chairman of Tata Sons—a position he was abruptly removed from in October 2016. On that ground and others the appellate tribunal had found oppression and mismanagement at the Tata Group holding company. Mistry’s family is the second largest shareholder in Tata Sons, with an 18.4% stake.

The NCLAT’s conclusions have been disregarded and not applied in the judgment by the apex court without even declaring the findings of fact to be perverse. This is the legal standard to be met, as acknowledged by the apex court itself in the judgment, before a court of law can interfere with findings of fact by the NCLAT.

Further, the Supreme Court ruling lays down contradictory legal propositions that are not only irreconcilable but also contrary to the company law statute, SP Group’s spokesperson told BloombergQuint.

Here are the key reasons that the Mistry group has cited for a review:

Most Related Links :
reporterwings Governmental News Finance News

Source link

Back to top button