New Delhi, Feb 21 (UNI) In a major relief to the Cyrus Mistry’s group, the Supreme Court in its order has decided to reconsider its March 26, 2021 judgement which had upheld the decision of Tata Sons to remove him as executive chairman in 2016 and director on the board of the company. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice NV Ramana and comprising Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian, in its order, by a majority view of 2:1, agreed to consider the review petition filed by the Mistry’s group in open court on March 9. Justice Ramasubramaian has dissented with this February 15 order to consider review petition. The review petition was considered inside judge’s chambers as per the Supreme Court rules. “Applications seeking oral hearing of the review petitions are allowed,” the majority view said in the order, released on Monday. Shapoorji Pallonji Group (Cyrus Mistry’s group) had knocked the doors of the Supreme Court on April 25 last year, by filing a review petition before it and challenged the top court’s March 26 judgement in which the SC had ruled in favour of the Tata Group. As per rules, the review petition is heard inside the chamber and before the same bench, which had passed the judgment in the case. The Supreme Court had in its judgement on March 26, said that all the questions of law are liable to be favoured for the Tata group, and the appeals are allowed by the Tata group. The top court had in its verdict last year said that “We leave it to Tata Sons, Cyrus Mistry to take any legal route to resolve issues of shares.” The Supreme Court had also said in its verdict that the pleas filed by Cyrus Investments, Sterling Investments, stands dismissed. The former CJI (Chief Justice of India) SA Bobde, led bench of the apex court, had passed the judgement on March 26, last year. “All the appeals filed by the Tata group against Cyrus Mistry allowed”, the CJI Bobde had said, in its judgement. The other two judges in the bench of the top court, along with the former CJI Bobde, who had pronounced the judgement were: Justice AS Bopanna and Justice V Ramasubramanian.
Comments are closed.