‘Personally disappointed’: Ex-Tata Sons chairman Cyrus Mistry on Supreme Court verdict – Times of India

NEW DELHI: Former Tata Sons chairman Cyrus Mistry on Tuesday said that being a minority shareholder of the company, he is “personally disappointed” by the outcome of the Supreme Court judgement.
In an official statement, Mistry said he hopes that the issues raised by him will cause deeper reflection and influence individuals concerned to catalyse change.
Last week, the apex court upheld Tata Sons’ decision to sack Mistry as chairman of the salt-to-software conglomerate.
It also rejected the Shapoorji Pallonji Group’s accusations against Ratan Tata, including Tata Sons boards’ allegedly oppressive practices against minority shareholders.
Mistry served as the chairman of Tata Sons from December 27, 2012 to October 24, 2016.
“Over the past four years, I’ve had the opportunity to reflect on my actions and on whether I could have handled the generational change in leadership better. In hindsight, while I may have had many imperfections, I have no doubt or erosion of conviction about the direction I chose, the integrity behind my actions and their consequences,” he added.
Expressing his gratitude for getting an opportunity to serve as the chairman of the iconic institution, Mistry thanked his team members. He said that they “all were bound together by the common value system embedded by the founders into the Tata Group.”
Mistry further clarified that his effort from day one was to ensure that the group, that was undergoing a generational change in leadership, had “a robust board-driven system of decision making and governance that is larger than any one individual… to enable directors on various boards to discharge their fiduciary duties without fear or favour, while still ensuring that shareholder views are reflected in strategy and actions.”
It continues to be my belief that it is by such a model, that one would protect value for all stakeholders in Tata Sons and its various group companies, he added.
Mistry also admitted that he will no longer be able to influence the direction of governance of the group directly.
(With inputs from agencies)