Cyrus Mistry wants case moved to NCLAT

Cyrus Investments and Sterling Investments, minority shareholders of Tata Sons, wanted the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to hear the original company petition in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case.

They also argued in a petition filed on Thursday that the Mumbai bench of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) did not expressly dispose of their plea for stay on the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) convened to remove Cyrus Mistry as a director in its January 18 order.

The current petition had prayers for NCLAT to set aside all three orders passed by the tribunal on December 22, January 18 and January 31.

It sought directions that "in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case that the company petition be heard by this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal itself," adding that Tata Sons be restrained from "taking steps of any nature directly or indirectly to remove" Mistry as a director.

The firms, controlled by Mistry and his family, moved the appellate body, after the tribunal refused to stay the EGM on Tuesday. While the companies had originally sought urgent relief from the tribunal, they told the appellate body that the tribunal had cleared the EGM in "undue haste". The petition will come up for hearing on Friday.

The petition filed by their Delhi-based counsel Jaitley and Bakshi argued that on the matter of removal of Mistry, "this impugned order dated 18.01.2017 did not at all deal with the stay application on merits and only set out the Tribunal's views on contempt of court." 

The tribunal directed the appellants to file an affidavit and respondents to file a reply to this giving three days each. "This clearly indicated that the tribunal wanted pleadings on the proposed removal so that it could consider the stay application separately on merits," the latest petition argued.

Separately, the original interim application which sought for a bar on changes to the Tata Sons Board of directors was listed for final hearing on January 31. 
 

According to the petition, "It was nobody's understanding that the application to stay the proposed removal" had been disposed of. However, on Tuesday, the tribunal ruled that "the stay application has been rejected on 18.01.2017 and that it had been open to appellants to file an appeal" and they had failed to do so.

In December, Mistry family firms had moved NCLT citing oppression and mismanagement after he was suddenly removed as chairman of Tata Sons in October. On December 22, NCLT passed a consent order giving respondents including Tata Sons and Mistry himself 15 days time to respond. After considering time required for rejoinders from appellants, the matter was posted hearings on January 31 and February 1.

In the meantime, Tata Sons issued notice for the EGM to remove Mistry as director. The Mistry firms then moved a contempt of court petition before NCLT citing the EGM notice as a violation of its December 22 order. This petition was disposed of by the NCLT's January 18 order.