MUMBAI: Tata Sons' counsel A M Singhvi concluded his arguments after six full days of being o his legs ahead of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in the mismanagement and oppressions criticism towards the conglomerate. The criticism used to be filed by means of two minority shareholders, corporations held by means of family of ousted Tata Sons chairperson Cyrus Mistry.
Singhvi identified that the allegations of a nexus between Tata and excessive favouritism for Siva team by means of Ratan Tata used to be "clearly a false and wild allegation by Cyrus Mistry" as used to be the allegation that Nano were perpetuated as a result of the obstinacy of Ratan Tata.
Singhvi referred to minutes of board meetings presided over by means of Mistry from 2013 to 2016 and letters to state that "he knew all facts" since inception and "never objected or protested and actively endorsed Tata's stand on most issues.'' Singhvi said that "all allegations had been barred by means of humongous prolong of many years.'' He mentioned, "at worst, they concerned issues of commercial judgement or knowledge which could no longer be retrospectively assailed by means of Mistry or reviewed the NCLT.''
Senior counsel Mohan Parasaran started his arguments after Singhvi, who will go back to present a sur rejoinder to senior counsel C A Sundaram's rejoinder later.
Singhvi identified that the allegations of a nexus between Tata and excessive favouritism for Siva team by means of Ratan Tata used to be "clearly a false and wild allegation by Cyrus Mistry" as used to be the allegation that Nano were perpetuated as a result of the obstinacy of Ratan Tata.
Singhvi referred to minutes of board meetings presided over by means of Mistry from 2013 to 2016 and letters to state that "he knew all facts" since inception and "never objected or protested and actively endorsed Tata's stand on most issues.'' Singhvi said that "all allegations had been barred by means of humongous prolong of many years.'' He mentioned, "at worst, they concerned issues of commercial judgement or knowledge which could no longer be retrospectively assailed by means of Mistry or reviewed the NCLT.''
Senior counsel Mohan Parasaran started his arguments after Singhvi, who will go back to present a sur rejoinder to senior counsel C A Sundaram's rejoinder later.
Mistry's allegations hit by humungous delay of decades: Tata counsel
![Mistry's allegations hit by humungous delay of decades: Tata counsel]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
January 21, 2018
Rating:
