The Mistry fraction has alleged that one of the trustees, A Soonawala was informed specifically of Tata Motors rights issue, a piece of price-sensitive information, even when he was not part of the company. The trustees have said that the whole narrative about interference and sharing of insider information has been invented and concocted now in this litigation.
"There is no such email and contesting respondents (SP Group) are stating falsehood with a deliberate intention to mislead this Hon'ble Court. The true fact is that an email was written to Respondent 11 (Cyrus Mistry) by Bharat Vasani purportedly summarising his own understanding of his telephonic conversation with Respondent 18 (R Venkataramanan). R-18 was not even copied on that email," said the trustees.
Also, Cyrus Mistry has cited the example of Tata Power's transaction with Welspun to acquire its asset as an illustration of 'interference' by A Soonawala and alleged that he had demanded 'inside information'. However, the trustees have said that the company had already announced that transaction and argued that there was a legitimate view, which the Trust-nominated directors had voiced, that this large and important transaction should have been placed before the Tata Sons Board before it was a "done deal".
Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily Market Updates & Live Business News.
1 Comment on this Story
Binu Pillai87 days ago
Mistry is a LOSER who weakened his own family group business S&P, and now destroying TATA