SC dismisses plea seeking review of Tata-mistry verdict

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a review petition filed by the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) Group against the removal of Cyrus Mistry as chairman of Tata Sons in October 2016.

Affirming its 2021 judgment, a bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana declined to reconsider the previous ruling on a batch of pleas filed on behalf of SP Group firms, Cyrus Investments Pvt Ltd and Sterling Investments Pvt Ltd. “Sorry, we are not inclined to entertain the review petition...not entertained. Dismissed,” said the bench, which also comprised justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian.

Ratan Tata, in a tweet, expressed his gratitude for the Supreme Court’s decision. “We would like to express our grateful appreciation of the judgement passed and upheld by the Supreme Court today,” wrote Tata. He added that the decision reinforces the value system and the ethics of India’s judiciary.

Mistry and Shapoorji Pallonji group did not immediately issue a statement.

By a judgment in March 2021, the Supreme Court set aside a tribunal’s 2019 order reinstating Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of the over $100 billion Tata Sons, describing Mistry as someone who “set his own house on fire” and turned out to be the “wrong decision of a lifetime” for Ratan Tata.

The top court, in its 2021 verdict, ruled that Tata Sons’ actions did not amount to mismanagement or oppression of minority shareholders. It also denied the

SP group, which held a 18.37% stake in Tata Sons, proportionate representation reflecting its shareholding in the company. The court said it was for Tata Sons and Mistry and his group to work out terms for separation, and declined to put a number to SP group’s holding in Tata Sons.

Pressing for a reconsideration of this judgment, SP group’s lawyers, senior advocates CA Sundaram and Shyam Divan, argued on Thursday that there are errors apparent on the face of the record which require reconsideration. The lawyers pressed for a review of the judgment on the aspect of rejecting Mistry’s contention that Tata Son’s affairs were conducted in a manner oppressive and prejudicial to the interests of Mistry’s SP group.

The court, however, agreed to consider another plea by the SP Group to expunge certain adverse remarks made against Mistry in its 2021 judgment. It told advocate Somasekharan Sundaram, who appeared for Mistry, that the court could omit one or two personal remarks made in its 2021 judgment, but clarified that no statement relating to facts of the case or the points of law should be revisited.

The bench also questioned Sundaram about a statement in Mistry’s application which read that “the judgment is worse than a press statement.” Sundaram, on his part, opted to withdraw such statements, conceding there is no intention to hurt the judges.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for Tata Sons, also agreed that some personal remarks against Mistry could be expunged. “As an act of grace, you may delete one or two observations”, Salve told the court.