[ By Bobby Anthony ]Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment directing reinstatement of Cyrus Pallonji Mistry as Director of the company.“The company has on January 3 filed an appeal before the Supreme Court against the judgment of NCLAT dated December 18, 2019, directing reinstatement of...
Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment directing reinstatement of Cyrus Pallonji Mistry as Director of the company.
“The company has on January 3 filed an appeal before the Supreme Court against the judgment of NCLAT dated December 18, 2019, directing reinstatement of Cyrus Pallonji Mistry as Director of the company for the rest of the tenure,” TCS stated in a recent regulatory filing.
Earlier, the NCLAT had restored Mistry as executive chairman of Tata Sons and ruled that appointment of N Chandrasekaran was “illegal”. In response to this decision, Tata Sons moved the Supreme Court.
Besides, Ratan Tata also moved the Supreme Court in his personal capacity challenging the NCLAT's verdict reinstating Cyrus Mistry as Tata Sons Chairman, alleging that in an instance of conflict of interest, Mistry was reluctant to disassociate himself from his family business even after he became the chairman of Tata Sons.
Ratan Tata moved the Supreme Court in his personal capacity, a day after Tata Sons moved the Supreme Court challenging NCLAT’s December 18 judgment reinstating Cyrus Mistry.
Ratan Tata mentioned in his petition to the Supreme Court that disassociation from Mistry’s family business, the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, was a precondition for his appointment as Tata Sons Chairman.
“Amongst the various fronts where Cyrus Mistry's leadership was lacking was his reluctance to timely and meaningfully disassociate himself from his family business after he became the Chairman of Tata Sons and address any conflict in this regard, which was a condition precedent to his appointment as Chairman of Tata Sons,” Ratan Tata's petition said.
Ratan Tata’s petition stated that Mistry's leadership lacked on various fronts and in the months before his replacement the relationship between him and Tata Trusts became discordant. Tata also said that Tata Trusts strongly felt that Mistry could not provide robust leadership to Tata Sons in future.