Tata Sons V Cyrus Mistry -Live Updates From Supreme Court(Day 5)

"If there is a section of board which thinks of taking advise of financial promoters and they have a meeting with them, how does it take away the independence of board? " CJI asks 

CJI: we agree but its a very broad phrase. What is there to prevent lobbying?

Sundaram: I do not have any judgment on that but according to my understanding, the independence of board is paramount.

CJI: we are looking for any observation on the issue of pre consultation and independence of Board 

"What board decides cannot be decided by promoter shareholders." he argued

"A conjoined reading of Article 121, 121A and 121B suggest that the intention was to have a majority control of Tata Sons"

"The board of directors have the final say in the meetings and not the promoter shareholders. In this case, the promoter shareholders were also considered in the meetings." 

"There are judgments of the Hon'ble Court and tribunals on this. " Sundaram replies 

Sundaram relies on the order of earlier Tribunals showing the lack of pre consultation in the meetings. "That is our issue here, your lords"

Is there any national or international law which governs the issue of prohibition of pre consultation? CJI asks.

CJI: We see that pre consultation is not permitted under Article 121. But is it totally prohibited?