Comments
The Shapoorji Pallonji Group (SP Group) has filed a review petition before the Supreme Court asking the apex court to look into the Tata Sons-Cyrus Mistry case, which was ruled in favour of Tata Sons.
The filing of the review petition came before the expiry of the 30-day deadline, which falls on April 25, and after the retirement of Chief Justice S A Bobde on April 24. The case is expected to be mentioned before the new CJI Justice NV Ramana next week.
Related Stories
SC sets aside NCLAT order reinstating Mistry as Tata Sons Executive Chairman
Dismisses allegations by the Mistry side of oppression of minority members by the Tatas“We are seeking clarifications on certain points of law in the judgement. The Supreme Court may not have addressed all the questions raised by Cyrus Mistry in his petition, and in the petition SP Group is asking to address these issues,” sources close to SP Group told BusinessLine , but did not divulge the details.
On March 26, the apex court had set aside a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order that re-instated Cyrus Mistry as Executive Chairman of Tata Sons, ruling in favour of the multi-billion dollar salt-to-software conglomerate Tata Group. SP Group had a 30-day deadline to filed a review petition, before the apex court.
Earlier, sources had told BusinessLine that SP Group was exploring all options, including filing a review petition and seeking legal recourse to determine the value of the stake they hold in Tata Sons. A decision of the Supreme Court or High Court can be reviewed only through a review petition, and under the apex court’s rules it has to be filed within 30 days of judgement.
The petition can be filed if there is prima facie evidence of glaring errors in the judgement, legal experts said.
Mistry, scion of Shapoorji Pallonji Group, a minority shareholder in Tatas Sons, was initially only removed from the post of executive chairman following a boardroom coup.
However, his subsequent actions, including the leaking of a confidential mail to the media to create a “sensation” and passing on information to the Income-Tax authorities while claiming to be a “law abiding citizen”, was an open declaration of “all-out war” against the Tatas. These led to his removal as a director, the apex court said in its March 26 order.
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.