Members Only
lock close icon

Tata vs Cyrus: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Cyrus Mistry's Plea After 10 Days

Cyrus Mistry sought to expunge remarks made against him by the top court

The Quint
Law
Published:
<div class="paragraphs"><p>Cyrus Mistry (Left) and Ratan Tata.</p></div>
i

Cyrus Mistry (Left) and Ratan Tata.

(Photo Courtesy: BloombergQuint)

advertisement

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Cyrus Mistry's plea which sought to expunge remarks made against him by the top court in a judgment upholding Tata Group's decision to remove him as its chairman, reported news agency ANI on Monday, 28 February.

The apex court has posted the matter for hearing after 10 days.

Background

A week ago, the Supreme Court had agreed to conduct an open court hearing on a review petition filed by Cyrus Investments against its verdict, accepting all contentions of the Tata conglomerate and setting aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order, which restored Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of the Tata conglomerate.

In March last year, a bench headed by then Chief Justice SA Bobde said all questions of law are in favour of Tata Group and dismissed the appeals filed by Mistry. The top court also upheld the Tata Sons decision to sack Cyrus Mistry on 24 October 2016.

A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana and comprising Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian considered the review petition filed by Mistry. Justice Ramasubramanian dissented.

The top court, in its 15 February order, said: "Applications seeking exemption from filing affidavits are allowed. Applications seeking oral hearing of the Review Petitions are allowed. List the Review Petitions on Wednesday, 9 March, 2022."

Justice Ramasubramanian, in his dissenting opinion, said:

"With utmost respect, I regret my inability to agree with the order. I have carefully gone through the Review Petitions and I do not find any valid ground to review the judgment. The grounds raised in the Review Petitions do not fall within the parameters of a review and hence the applications seeking oral hearing deserve to be dismissed."

(With inputs from ANI.)

(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)

Become a Member to unlock
  • Access to all paywalled content on site
  • Ad-free experience across The Quint
  • Early previews of our Special Projects
Continue

Published: undefined

ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL FOR NEXT