CASE STUDY OF CYRUS MYSTRY

CASE OF CYRUS MYSTERY-

This case is about the fight between the CEO who is not the part of the Tata

family and between the management. Cyrus Mistry joined the board of 

Shapoorji Pallonji Group, the biggest shareholder of Tata and sons in 1991 as 

director and he was appointed as the M.D of the group in 1994. Shapoorji 

Pallonji holds around 18% of the Tata and sons shares.

The fight between the management and the Chairman of the Tata and Sons 

flashed across the world when Mr Cyrus Mistry was removed from his office, 

and Mr Ratan Tata was appointed as the Interim Chairman of the group.

Removal of Cyrus Mistry from his office is not something which has happened 

all of sudden rather it was under consideration from a very long time.

The removal of Cyrus Mistry is termed to be legal as per the provisions of the 

Indian law. The removal of Cyrus Mistry was executed by getting a majority 

against his removal from the office

Shapoorji Pallonji group made a statement that they are going through the 

circumstances and there is no consideration for any legal action against Tata 

and Sons, Cyrus Mistry too went on to use the same note and denied that he 

is thinking of any legal steps

The Stocks of listed Tata Companies fell by 3.16% in the stock market after 

the removal of Cyrus Mistry from his office which created a lot of panic in the 

market.

Cyrus Mistry came out with the point that he was not given an appropriate 

opportunity to defend himself which has been provided under law.

Cyrus Mistry wrote a letter that he was shocked that he had been removed 

from his office on account of non-performance and he alleged that the board 

never gave him the appropriate opportunity.

Cyrus Mistry argued that the Nano project had become a burden on the 

company but it is being continued only due to emotional reasons, and there is a lot of fraudulent in the manner the money is being invested Cyrus Mistry 

filed his reply along with the Affidavit to the National Company Law Tribunal 

(NCLT), in which he said that he was not allowed to run the group as per his 

own, rather it interfered by the members of the Tata Trust Group which hold 

almost 66% of the shares of the group’s parent company. He even said that 

Ratan Tata, Noshir Soonawala and R. Venkataraman interfered a lot in the 

running of the company and he was not allowed to work freely rather he was 

at all times put under the pressure of working as per the wishes of Ratan 

Tata.

Cyrus Mistry has provided the documents as evidence to prove that there 

was a lot of interference by Ratan Tata in working of his office.

Cyrus Mistry, as well as the Management of Tata and Sons, have filed a 

caveat in the Supreme Court, High Court, as well as the National Company 

Law Tribunal (NCLT), avoiding any ex-parte orders against them.

Cyrus Mistry still enjoys the support of the biggest shareholder of the group, 

although this cannot help him legally, but he could use this fact to pressurise 

the group. He has filed his reply stating that he was removed from his office 

illegally and has submitted certain documents as evidence to prove that Mr 

Ratan Tata has been interfering in his work.

Whatever is done was for the benifit of the company, Although Cyrus has given the evidence that he was being interferred by the higher authorities but still every founder tries to make his business always successful and thus tries to know about the business even after retirement it doesnt mean he is interfering,l. Also, Ratan Tata is the one who has make the company reach to its height, so if he is trying to do something in it he might be doing this for the best. Cyrus Mystry was removed after a complete considerataion of the Board Of Directors. Removal of  Cyrus Mystry was legal and by the voting of all the board of directors.