10 Important Arbitration Judgments of 2023
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 89
Tata Sons
Delhi High Court dismisses PIL by Subramanian Swamy against Union approval for JV partnership between Air Asia Investments Ltd and Tata Sons
The Union decision is contrary to the FDI Policy of the Government of India and contrary to the guidelines laid down by the Union Ministry of Civil Aviation.
Tata v. Mistry: A Case for Greater Protection of Minority Shareholders’ Rights
by Varghese George Thekkel†
‘Reinstatement by NCLAT “too big a pill” for perhaps even Cyrus Mistry to swallow’; Here’s why Supreme Court upheld Cyrus Mistry’s removal as Chairman by the Tata Sons
“NCLAT appears to have granted the relief of reinstatement gratis without any foundation in pleadings, without any prayer and without any basis in law, thereby forcing upon the appellant an Executive Chairman, who now is unable to support his own reinstatement. “
Tata v. Mistry | NCLAT explains why RoC cannot take advantage of S. 43-A(2-A) of Companies Act, 1956; Clarifies, no aspersion cast on RoC in earlier order
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A Bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson, and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial), dismissed the interlocutory
[Breaking] Removal of Cyrus Mistry as Chairman of Tata Sons held illegal by NCLAT
As reported by media, NCLAT has restored Cyrus Mistry as the Executive Chairman of Tata Sons and held the appointment of N
No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a ‘hybrid’ company all along: NCLAT
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A two-member bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial)
No merit in Cyrus Mistry’s petition against removal as Chairman (Tata Sons): NCLT
National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT): The petitioner’s who held over 18% equity shares in Tata Sons Ltd., were propelled to file the