legal | IST

CNBC-TV18 Excl: Supreme Court verdict in Tata-Mistry case will be guideposts for corporates in future, says Abhishek Manu Singhvi

Mini

Supreme Court has dismissed the petition of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group alleging the oppression of minority interest by the Tata Sons. The court also set aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order which had reinstated Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of Tata Sons. It, however, left to the two parties to determine fair compensation for Shapoorji Pallonji’s interest in Tata Sons.

Supreme Court has dismissed the petition of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group alleging the oppression of minority interest by the Tata Sons. The court also set aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order which had reinstated Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of Tata Sons. It, however, left to the two parties to determine fair compensation for Shapoorji Pallonji’s interest in Tata Sons.
Speaking with CNBC-TV18, senior Tata Sons Counsel and Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, “As a lawyer, I think there is great satisfaction as a number of legal principles have been set right. I said with great respect to the NCLAT that there were a very large number of great errors that should have faltered the landscape of corporate law for decades and it needed the Supreme Court to set it right and I am glad it happened in approximately one year etc.”
“At a personal level, I think there was, unfortunately, a lot of hitting below the belt in certain times and it caused a lot of angst, a lot of anguish to the principal persona concerned.”
Singhvi further added, “The five issues which the honourable Chief Justice read out today and summarised are seminal issues for corporate law and they have been decided definitively and in great detail and obviously in favour of the Tatas. So they will be guidepost and polestar for the future for corporate law.”
On the settlement issue, Singhvi said, “Let me clarify great misconception here, please be clear - none of the issues either directly or indirectly, none of the core issues, nor the ancillary arteries, the supposed subsidiary channels can be activated again in any litigation by any party.”
The settlement issue is not a legal question, Singhvi said.
“It is again an equal misconception to think of settlement as anything to do with this litigation. Don’t think there is new litigation in the offing because it is a consensual issue. It is made clear in the judgement that there is no question of a legal issue on separation being decided or even arising.”
Watch the accompanying video for more.
next story

Market Movers

Currency

CompanyPriceChng%Chng