Wadia files criminal defamation case against Tata Group
DEFENDING HIS NAME Also sues Ratan Tata, Tata Sons Board
MUMBAI: Industrialist Nusli Wadia has filed a criminal defamation complaint against Tata Sons, Ratan Tata and the board of directors of some Tata group companies for hurting his reputation by making false allegations.
“The complaint is filed under sections of the Indian Penal Code for causing criminal defamation with common intention,” Wadia’s lawyer Abad Ponda said. “We have alleged that the contents of the notices were offending and questioned his bonafides,” the noted criminal lawyer added.
In the complaint filed before the additional chief metropolitan magistrate, Ballard Pier, Wadia has alleged that, “the defamatory and offending contents of special notices (issued by Tata Sons for convening special shareholder meetings) have caused severe prejudice to the reputation and goodwill of the complainant as also affected his status as an independent director not only in Tata Group companies, but as a director in various other companies; and will continue to have a cascading effect on the complainant’s reputation and goodwill in business circles within India and abroad.”
Tata Sons, in their notices for the extraordinary general meetings (EGMs), has said that Wadia is being sought to be removed for his collusion with ousted chairman Cyrus Mistry, and for acting against the interests of the group companies.
Apart from Tata Sons and Ratan Tata, the complaint also names Tata Sons board members Ajay Piramal, Amit Chandra, Ishaat Hussain, Nitin Nohria, Ranendra Sen, Vijay Singh, Venu Srinivasan, Ralph Speth, N Chandrasekaran and FN Subedar.
The complaint has been filed under Section 500 (defamation), with section 34 (common intention) and 109 (abetment of offence) of the Indian Penal Code, which are punishable with a simple imprisonment for a term, which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Wadia has also sought compensation according to the provisions of Section 357 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and the cost of the litigation for pursuing the complaint as provided under Section 359 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.