oppn parties The Tatas Versus The Mistrys: Time Now For A Clean Separation

News Snippets

  • Sikh extremists attacked a cinema hall in London that was playing Kangana Ranaut's controversial film 'Emergency'
  • A Delhi court directed the investigating agencies to senstize officers to collect nail clippings, fingernail scrappings or finger swab in order to get DNA profile as direct evidence of sexual attack is often not present and might result in an offender going scot free
  • Uniform Civil Code rules cleared by state cabinet, likely to be implemented in the next 10 days
  • Supreme Court reiterates that there is no point in arresting the accused after the chargesheet has been filed and the investigation is complete
  • Kolkata court sentences Sanjoy Roy, the sole accused in the R G Kar rape-murder case, to life term. West Bengal government and CBI to appeal in HC for the death penalty
  • Supreme Court stays criminal defamation case against Rahul Gandhi for his remarks against home minister Amit Shah in Jharkhand during the AICC plenary session
  • Government reviews import basket to align it with the policies of the Trump administration
  • NCLT orders liquidation of GoAir airlines
  • Archery - Indian archers bagged 2 silver in Nimes Archery tournament in France
  • Stocks make impressive gain on Monday - Sensex adds 454 points to 77073 and Nifty 141 points to 23344
  • D Gukesh draws with Fabiano Caruana in the Tata Steel chess tournament in the Netherlands
  • Women's U-19 T20 WC - In a stunning game, debutants Nigeria beat New Zealand by 2 runs
  • Rohit Sharma to play under Ajinkye Rahane in Mumbai's Ranji match against J&K
  • Virat Kohli to play in Delhi's last group Ranji trophy match against Saurashtra. This will be his first Ranji match in 12 years
  • The toll in the Rajouri mystery illness case rose to 17 even as the Centre sent a team to study the situation
Calling the case not 'rarest of rare', a court in Kolkata sentenced Sanjay Roy, the only accused in the R G Kar rape-murder case to life in prison until death
oppn parties
The Tatas Versus The Mistrys: Time Now For A Clean Separation

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-03-30 06:00:42

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.

In 2016, the Tata Sons board removed Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of the group in a majority decision. Aggrieved, Mistry approached the NCLT which dismissed his petition. But he got relief in NCLAT which reinstated him and termed the appointment of his successor N Chandrasekaran as illegal. The Tatas approached the Supreme Court against the NCLAT order which has not put the controversy to rest by setting aside the NCLAT order.

The matter before the Supreme Court involved the removal of Cyrus Mistry, the appointment of N Chandrasekaran, the oppression of minority shareholders, conversion of Tata Sons into a privately-held company, mismanagement at Tata Sons and valuation of shares of Tata Sons.

By rejecting the NCLAT order, the Supreme Court has clearly ruled that neither Mistry's removal nor the appointment of Chandrasekaran was illegal. In fact, the court made a pertinent observation when it said that since the door through which Mistry got in (was appointed chairman) was the same from which he was asked to exit, how can he rail against the door for removing him when he had no qualms about entering through the same door? The court said that since both decisions were made by a majority of the board, there was nothing illegal about them.

The court also held that there was no mismanagement and oppression of minority shareholders, as alleged, at Tata Sons. The court also rejected the plea against allowing the company to go private. This decision is likely to benefit many other widely-held companies that are planning to go private. But the court refused to value the shares of Tata Sons and said that it should be decided between the parties. This issue is likely to linger as the Tatas have valued Mistrys' 18.4 percent stake at around Rs 70000-80000cr while the Mistrys' claim it to be Rs 1,75,000cr.

Since the boardroom battle will see a closure after the Supreme Court order, both parties need to come to an understanding regarding the valuation to arrive at an amicable settlement for a clean separation. It is now clear that the Mistrys need to separate from the Tatas for the good of both. If the valuation issue is not settled, this will not be possible. Hence, since the Supreme Court has refused to value the shares, both parties should sit across the table and find a middle ground. The Tatas should now show magnanimity by ensuring that the Mistrys  get a fair return on their investment (linked to present market value) and the Mistrys must accept a fair offer even if it is slightly less than what they have in mind.