Tata Sons vs Cyrus Mistry : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing

CJI : This is our way of saying that if we dismiss our case, it is not because you are a bad lawyer.

Salve (laughing) : That is what we tell our clients. Mr Ramaswamy used to say, when a case is lost in first instance, client will be told that he has won a right to appeal.

CJI : The best lose more than they win. In worst cases, the litigants find the best lawyer to argue for them.

Salve : When you have a growth story of 500%, there will be some winners projects some loser projects. It is a mix.

CJI : This is like that of a successful Senior Advocate. The successful lose more cases.

Salve : The company had been run amazingly.During tenure of Mr. Ratan Tata between 1991 to 2012, the market cap of Tatas went up 500 times.

Salve : The grounds for winding up are in Section 271 of the Companies Act. Those factors have to be fulfilled.

Salve : I don't think the language of Section 242 of Companies Act admit of any ambiguity. The Tribunal has to come to two conclusion :

1. There is prejudice, oppression etc, AND

2. The facts would justify the making of a winding up order.

Salve : A member of Tata Sons may complain about Tata Sons Ltd and not other companies. There is not a single allegation about mismanagement within Tata Sons Ltd.

Salve : There could be different perceptions about the decisions. But can it be mismanagement?

CJI : So you are saying if there is a strategy which did not work, it will not be mismanagement?

Salve : Hindsight is always different. When car industry was booming, Ratan Tata thought he will give a car for Indians at Rs one lakh. But the project ran into trouble later. It got into problems in West Bengal, had to be shifted to Gujarat etc.

Salve : But there is no single allegation that money of Tata Sons has been lost.