TATA v MISTRY

Hearing to resume today in Supreme Court. Senior Advocate CA Sundaram to continue arguments on behalf of Shapoorji Pallonji firms.

Follow this thread for live updates from court.

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies

#SupremeCourt #tatamistry

TATA v MISTRY

Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde assembles.

Hearing commences.

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY

CJI SA Bobde announces that over the weekend he discovered his son who is practicing in Mumbai has been appearing for the last 2 years in a slum rehabilitation matter for a subsidiary company of Shapoorji Pallonji group.

@tatatrusts
TATA v MISTRY

CJI asks whether Harish Salve, Dr Singhvi or CA Sundaram has any objections to CJI hearing the matter.

None of them object. The same is recorded by the Court.

Hearing continues.

#SupremeCourt
TATA v MISTRY

CJI says such issues could cause potential problems in future.

Sundaram continues with his arguments.

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY

Sundaram citing Articles of Tata Sons to show the supremacy of the Board.

Article 121A was introduced to ensure that certain matters had to necessarily have Board approval.

#SupremeCourt #TataSons
TATA v MISTRY

SP group also voted in favour of A 121 due to the relationship of trust they had with Tata Sons.

SP group could not have conceived that the article would be used against them: Sundaram.

#tatasons #SupremeCourt
TATA v MISTRY

Discussion on interest that Ratan Tata had in Ola/ Uber

Sundaram says he had a personal interest in Ola

CJI Bobde: Does it mean he had business interest

Dr. Singhvi says he wanted to have Tata cars used in Ola and Uber and not just Ola as suggested by Mistry
TATA v MISTRY

CJI Bobde: Mr. Sundaram, you must bear in mind that this is a private company. Our experience with such companies is that they have heads of families controlling, giving directions etc. Birlas, Tata all have such structures.

Your SP Group might also have it.
TATA v MISTRY

CJI Bobde: What is wrong in head of family wanting information or wanting to control decisions.

@tatatrusts
@TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY

Sundaram: This company owns many listed companies running to 65 lakh crores with public shareholders. So there should be some kind of independence in decision making.

If they wanted to keep a family affair, they should have remained so instead of making it public
TATA v. MISTRY

A public charitable trust cannot legally run such companies. That is why it needs it be "board run": CA Sundaram.

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies

#SupremeCourt
TATA v MISTRY

They cannot use the Articles to claim that they have absolute right over affairs of the company: CA Sundaram

Bench rises. Hearing to continue tomorrow.

@tatatrusts

#TataSons #SupremeCourt
TATA v Mistry: What is wrong in head of family wanting a say in the company's affairs?: Supreme Court asks [LIVE UPDATES]

#TataSons @tatatrusts @TataCompanies @RNTata2000
#cyrusmistry
https://t.co/gMD5CxzO66

More from Bar & Bench

More from Law

We need to talk about the 'expert' witness statement evidence led by Ms Bell in her successful case before the Tavistock. THREAD

You can see who gave evidence in her support from these extracts from the Tavistock's Skeleton Argument.


Helpful for you to bear in mind that her solicitor was a man called Paul Conrathe, who has a long association with the religious right in the US (I have talked about him a number of times but this is as good a starting point as any).


I am not going to address here other criticisms that might be made of the form in which that evidence was given or the timing of its service before the court. I am just going to address, in alphabetical order, the individuals whose evidence Mr Conrathe led on Ms Bell's behalf.

The first witness, alphabetically, was Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oxford, Michael Biggs.

Mr Biggs was exposed for posting transphobic statements online under a fake twitter handle: @MrHenryWimbush according to this report.

You May Also Like

**Thread on Bravery of Sikhs**
(I am forced to do this due to continuous hounding of Sikh Extremists since yesterday)

Rani Jindan Kaur, wife of Maharaja Ranjit Singh had illegitimate relations with Lal Singh (PM of Ranjit Singh). Along with Lal Singh, she attacked Jammu, burnt - https://t.co/EfjAq59AyI


Hindu villages of Jasrota, caused rebellion in Jammu, attacked Kishtwar.

Ancestors of Raja Ranjit Singh, The Sansi Tribe used to give daughters as concubines to Jahangir.


The Ludhiana Political Agency (Later NW Fronties Prov) was formed by less than 4000 British soldiers who advanced from Delhi and reached Ludhiana, receiving submissions of all sikh chiefs along the way. The submission of the troops of Raja of Lahore (Ranjit Singh) at Ambala.

Dabistan a contemporary book on Sikh History tells us that Guru Hargobind broke Naina devi Idol Same source describes Guru Hargobind serving a eunuch
YarKhan. (ref was proudly shared by a sikh on twitter)
Gobind Singh followed Bahadur Shah to Deccan to fight for him.


In Zafarnama, Guru Gobind Singh states that the reason he was in conflict with the Hill Rajas was that while they were worshiping idols, while he was an idol-breaker.

And idiot Hindus place him along Maharana, Prithviraj and Shivaji as saviours of Dharma.