Tata Sons not a family-run venture to be led only by a Tata: SP Group | Economic Times

NEW DELHI: Shapoorji Pallonji Group told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that Tata Sons was not a family-run enterprise to be headed only by a Tata and emphasised that to end oppression of minority stakeholders in the corporate giant controlled by Tata Trusts, Cyrus Mistry needed to be appointed as a director on the company’s board.“We still maintain that we do not want reinstatement of Mistry as executive chairman of Tata Sons,” SP Group counsel C A Sundaram told a bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian. Mistry was sacked as executive chairman in 2016, ostensibly because of his differences with his predecessor Ratan Tata, who remained chairman emeritus of the company. 79751760Senior advocate Sundaram said Tata Sons was not a family held business for the largest shareholder, Tata Trusts, to dictate the agenda and intrude in every major decision.“The majority shareholder cannot say my way or the highway. The interest of all shareholders, particularly the minority group, must be protected. Differences arose and led to sacking, mainly because Mistry was opposed to Tata Group’s deal with loss-making Corus and continuance with the Nano car project, which was bleeding the company,” he said.The bench said these were not examples of oppression by the majority group. “It is not that these deals were designed to make the minority group alone lose money. If it was a loss, then it hurt both majority and minority shareholders equally,” it said.Sundaram said he was making precisely that point, that a board must ensure protection of all stakeholders.Sundaram said Tata Sons was a public company, which carried the hopes and aspirations of myriad shareholders whose investments needed protection through prudent decisions.“If Tata Trusts thinks that Tata Sons needed a Tata or a person with Tata family links to lead the company or be involved in decision-making, then Cyrus Mistry too has it. His sister is married to Ratan Tata’s half brother Noel Tata,” Sundaram said.The SP Group’s argument that it was not seeking Mistry’s reinstatement as executive chairman of Tata Sons made the CJI-led bench recount its January 10 observations during the first hearing of appeal by Tata Sons against the NCLAT order reinstating Mistry as its executive chairman and converting the private limited company into public limited company.“We are completely surprised by some of the legal aspects of this case. Does NCLAT have suo motu powers to reinstate Mistry as executive chairman when that is not even sought? Apparently it does not have suo motu powers. Even a civil court does not have suo motu powers. That is the most amazing part, to reinstate Mistry as executive chairman when it was not even sought,” the bench said.Arguments will continue on Wednesday.