Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

The battle between <keyword id="46894" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Tata-Sons">Tata Sons</keyword> and Cyrus Mistry is not going to end soon as it is just getting murkier. Now, Mistry has dismissed accusation levelled by Tatas that he acted on his own regarding the Docomo deal, without informing the Tata Board. 
 Mistry, in a statement, said it was 'false and mischievous' to suggest that he acted on his own or without the knowledge of <keyword id="6360722" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="ratan-tata">Ratan Tata</keyword> on the Tata-Docomo matter. 
 
“Insinuations that Docomo issue was handled in a manner inconsistent with Tata culture and values are baseless,” the statement from Mistry’s office read. 
 
Mistry said all the decisions regarding the Docomo deal was taken after the approval of Ratan Tata and Tata Sons Board. 
 
" The suggestion that Ratan Tata and the trustees would not have approved of the manner in which the litigation was conducted is contrary to what transpired," the statement said. 
 
Stating that a number of discussions on the Docomo situation had been held in the Tata Sons board, the statement added: "Mistry had always mentioned that the Tatas should honour all commitments within the law. This stance is based on Tata Sons' board view and was always consistent with the series of board meetings in which the Docomo issue was discussed." 
 
Tata Group is entangled in a legal tussle with Japanese firm, NTT DoCoMo. DoCoMo had in November 2009 acquired 26.5 per cent stake in Tata Teleservices for about Rs 12,740 crore (at Rs 117 per share) with an understanding that in case it exits the venture within five years, it will be paid a minimum 50 per cent of the acquisition price. 
 
DoCoMo, in April 2014, decided to exit the joint venture that struggled to grow subscribers quickly and sought Rs 58 per share or Rs 7,200 crore from the Tatas. 
 
But the Indian group offered Rs 23.34 a share in line with RBI guidelines that states that an international firm can only exit its investment at a valuation "not exceeding that arrived at on the basis of return on equity". 
 
The Japanese firm then dragged the Tatas to international arbitration where it won a $1.17 billion award. 
 
"Nevertheless, the Tatas applied to RBI for approval. Since RBI approval was not forthcoming, Docomo initiated arbitration. The award was passed in favour of Docomo and against the Tatas," the statement added. 
 
Tatas did not challenge the award in the UK. On the contrary, RBI was approached once again by the Tatas for permission to pay the amount awarded. RBI again refused permission, the statement said. 
 
"When Docomo sought enforcement of the award in the Delhi High Court, in order to show their bonafides, Tatas deposited a sum in excess of Rs 8,000 crore in court," it added. 
 
Insisting that Tata and NA Soonawala, Trustee, were kept informed throughout the process, the statement said they even participated in separate meetings held with Mistry. 
 
"They also participated in the meeting with the legal counsel (who also happened to be a trustee of the Dorabji Tata trust) and who represented Tatas in the litigation. At all times, Ratan Tata and Soonawala concurred and approved the course of action adopted by the Tatas and as advised by legal counsel," it said. 
 
"In light of the above facts, to suggest that Mr Mistry acted on his own, or contrary to 'Tata values', or without the knowledge and/or concurrence of Ratan Tata and Soonawala is as false as it is mischievous," the statement by his office added.

Mistry’s war of words with Tatas escalates; says 'mischievous' to suggest he acted on his own on Docomo deal

<keyword id="6354335" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="reserve-bank-of-india">Reserve Bank of India</keyword> (RBI), the central banking authority of the country has opposed a pact between the <keyword id="6355725" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Tata-Group">Tata Group</keyword> and <keyword id="18313" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="NTT-Docomo">NTT Docomo</keyword>, which was made to resolve a long standing <keyword id="45001" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="dispute">dispute</keyword> between the two. 
 
It was during a hearing in the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/topic/Delhi-High-Court">Delhi High Court</a> that <keyword id="4271219" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="RBI-opposed-Tata">RBI opposed Tata</keyword>’s decision to pay Docomo, arguing that such payment would amount to transfer of shares, thus rendering it illegal. 
 
The dispute was over the enforcement of a $1.17-billion arbitral award by an international court to Docomo. 
 
Justice S Murlidhar, however, wanted to know if the banking authority could oppose the award's enforcement when both Tata and Docomo had agreed to settle down the matter. Tata group has already deposited the amount with the court, and the next hearing is on March 14. He also added that the case had international implications. 
 
Also read: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/is-rbi-regretting-demonetization/articleshow/56537156.cms">Is RBI regretting demonetization?</a> 
 
To this, RBI lawyer Mukund C told the court that any step that led to payment being made to Docomo would set an example, and that Docomo he <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/This-is-what-makes-RBI-one-of-the-countrys-most-desirable-employers/articleshow/52832249.cms">banking regulator </a>was also concerned that the Japanese company may pursue similar enforcement in the US and the UK if it doesn't succeed in India. 
 
The court held this argument as "absurd, as RBI's writ wouldn't run overseas in any case. 
 
Also read: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/Tata-Teleservices-DoCoMo-To-Split-Setting-Stage-For-Negotiations-Over-Valuation/articleshow/38125072.cms">Tata Teleservices &amp; DoCoMo To Split, Setting Stage For Negotiations Over Valuation</a> 
 
"RBI has no jurisdiction outside India," the judge said. "How can you object to enforceability anywhere else in the world? If they (Tata) have assets anywhere else, they (Docomo) can move a court there for the enforcement of the award. There is no law prohibiting it," he added. 
 
When asked if the deal required special permissions, Mukund sought for time to seek instructions about the same. 
 
The case involves <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/topic/NTT-Docomo">NTT Docomo</a> fighting Tata Sons over the right to sell its stake in the Indian wireless venture for at least half the original value, according to the terms of the 2009 agreement. Even though Tata group said that it was willing to pay the award, Indian rules prohibited it, saying that valuation has to be based on present fair value. 
 
(Image source: IB Times)

RBI opposes Tata’s decision to pay Docomo over two-year long dispute

MUMBAI: Japan’s <keyword id="18313" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="NTT-Docomo">NTT DoCoMo</keyword> has decided to exit <keyword id="6359475" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Tata-Teleservices">Tata Teleservices</keyword> by selling its 26.5% stake in its telecom joint venture with the <keyword id="6355725" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Tata-Group">Tata Group</keyword> through a pre-agreed put option, setting the stage for protracted negotiations over valuation as the Indian conglomerate is likely to renegotiate the sum it has to pay to buy back the shares. The agreement was signed between the two companies in 2008-09. 
 
Both Cos have Hired Legal Teams 
 
Under the terms of the agreement, the Tata Group needs to ensure that its partner in the lossmaking joint venture gets the higher of either half the investment it made — which amounts to Rs 7,250 crore — or the stake’s fair market price in case the company fails to perform at a certain level. NTT DoCoMo had issued a notice to the Tatas three days ago, exercising its option to get a refund of Rs 7,250 crore by returning its 26% in Tata Teleservices before the deadline on July 9, said a lawyer involved in the transaction. 
 
Confirming the development, Tata Sons spokesman Debasis Ray said in an email: “The formal communication has now been received from NTT DoCoMo to that effect.” However, the Tata Group, which has applied for RBI approval to pay NTT DoCoMo as per the put option, expects regulatory hurdles. A central bank rule says put options must be exercised based on prevailing return on equity at the time the option is exercised, which could play spoilsport for DoCoMo’s exit plan. 
 
Since Tata Tele has been making losses and its net worth is negative, this clause could mean DoCoMo might not get the price it is looking for. RBI, in its latest monetary policy in May, had indicated that it was examining a mechanism linking such options to a fair market value, but it is yet to implement that decision. 
 
DoCoMo had purchased its Tata Tele stake in instalments in 2009 and 2011 for $2.7 billion, at a time the telecom sector was the poster child of India’s fast-growing economy. 
 
Facing the prospect of lengthy negotiations to arrive at a middle ground on valuations, the Tatas have lined up legal eagle Harish Salve, law firm Amarchand Mangaldas, UK-based firm Freshfields, and Mumbai-based AZB Partners to act on its behalf. NTT DoCoMo is likely to be represented by Khaitan &amp; Co, law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher &amp; Flom. 
 
NTT DoCoMo spokeswoman Hiroko Shimoyama said she cannot comment due to confidentiality obligations.The joint venture partners will soon enter into fresh talks to arrive at a final price, according to people familiar with the matter. “One hopes that it won’t come to a legal battle. Both groups are reasonable and prefer to avoid that,” said a person involved.“ 
 It is not possible to predict how events will unfold; however, Tata Sons is cognizant of its responsibilities, and will act keeping in mind the interests of all stakeholders and in accordance with law,” added Roy, reiterating an April 25 statement by Tata Sons.The RBI rule was also invoked by the <keyword id="6425677" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Essar-Group">Essar Group</keyword> when Vodafone exercised its option to buy Essar’s 33% in Vodafone India in 2011. 
 
However, the two companies agreed to up the price a little for the Indian promoter by depositing additional funds in an escrow account in case tax is imposed on the transaction, else the deposited amount will be given to Essar. This time around, as money will go out of India, the deal might attract more scrutiny. 
 
<div style="page-break-after: always;">
	&#xa0;</div>
“In 2008, there was no regulation around put calls. People assumed that these contracts will be honoured and so incorporated them in JV agreements. But RBI has now become far stricter and concerned over outflow of dollars,” said a legal advisor involved. 
 
NTT DoCoMo is the second large Japanese investor to be faced with disappointment in its India investment after Daiichi Sankyo’s buy into generic drug-maker Ranbaxy. Daiichi exited its Ranbaxy investment in May this year, selling its stake to Sun Pharma at less than half the $4.6 billion it paid in 2008. 
 
LOSS-MAKING VENTURE 
 
The Japanese company is exiting the Indian telecom venture since it is known to prefer owning a majority in its ventures and because it feels it cannot control management actions adequately in India, said a person familiar with DoCo-Mo’s thinking. They are also disappointed by the company’s performance. For the year ending March 31, 2014, Tata Teleservices recorded a loss of nearly Rs 2,000 crore, according to data from the Registrar of Companies (RoC). Its user base has been shrinking over the past two years. 
 
In December last year, Tata Teleservices’ lenders had insisted on a Rs 4,000-crore equity investment from the parents to recapitalise the company. Tata Sons had agreed to put in that amount through two tranches. In an effort to reduce losses, Tata Teleservices shut base stations at around 8,000 locations and entered into agreements with rivals Aircel and Reliance Communications to provide coverage where its network has gaps. 
 
In the financial year that ended in March 2013, Tata Teleservices’ net worth was completely wiped out and equity value fell to a negative Rs 1,863 crore from around Rs 3,000 crore in the previous year, according to data with RoC. Tata Teleservices is also weighed down by its debt of Rs 28,000 crore. The sum is said to have deterred potential suitors including Vodafone, and the exit of NTT DoCoMo may put this company at risk of becoming a distress sale target, said an investment banker. 
 The Tata Sons spokesman said substantial value had been created. “On the valuation of TTSL, it is an unlisted company. Substantial value has been created in it, reflected not only in its large retail subscriber base of over 63 million and its successful enterprise offerings, but also in its market leading position in data carriage, reflected in the high <keyword id="34527" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="40" keywordseo="market-share">market share</keyword> of products like Photon,” said the spokesperson. 
 
Top executives at two potential acquirers of the company said they were interested but did not want to take on the debt. For a deal to take place, they said, lenders need to take a “haircut” by writing off part of their exposure to Tata Tele, or the Tata Group has to assume responsibility for some of the debt. The Tata Group had evinced interest in exiting the telecom business as far back as 2010, and has refrained from any major investments since Chairman Cyrus Mistry took over.

Tata Teleservices & DoCoMo To Split, Setting Stage For Negotiations Over Valuation

<keyword id="6355725" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Tata-Group">Tata Group</keyword> has lined up funds to buy back NTT <keyword id="6711152" type="COMPANY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Docomo">Docomo</keyword>'s 26.5% stake in their telecom joint venture, according to insiders familiar with the development. 
 In April this year, the Japanese firm decided to exit the JV with loss-making <keyword id="6359475" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Tata-Teleservices">Tata Teleservices</keyword>, which means the Indian company is now left with two options – it can either buy back the stake in the JV or can look for another buyer as per the 2009 JV agreement. According to that accord, if it can't find a buyer by the end of June 2014, the Tata Group will have to pay a market-linked price or at least Rs 7,250 crore, which is 50% of the investment that the Japanese firm had made into the joint venture. 
 Sources informed that the Tata Group had approached <keyword id="15492" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Vodafone">Vodafone</keyword> India for a lock-stock-and-barrel sale of the unit. However, neither Tata Teleservices nor Vodafone confirmed the development. 
 
The valuation, too, may become a sticking point in the negotiations as Tata Teleservices has run into a massive debt, making its net worth negative. "With this debt level and inadequate profit generation to service it, the company's equity value to a third party is very little," a banker told the Economic Times. 
 
According to analysts’ estimates, Tata Teleservices' enterprise value could range between Rs 29,700 crore and Rs 32,200 crore. Having taken out the debt, its value is likely to be between Rs 1,700 crore and Rs 4,200 crore. 
 
Insiders also say that the Tata Group is unlikely to sell the business at that price and it may keep the stake after buying it from Docomo unless it gets an adequate price. 
 The latest development involving the JV between Tata Teleservices and NTT Docomo reflects the sorry state of affairs faced by the less popular operators which are struggling to stay afloat in a market dominated by three leaders – Bharti <keyword id="15491" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Airtel">Airtel</keyword>, Vodafone India and <keyword id="6354924" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Idea-Cellular">Idea Cellular</keyword>.

Tata Group May Buy Back NTT Docomo’s Stake
In JV

As the price competition in India’s telecom space heats up, a number of smaller players are falling by the wayside. <keyword id="6359475" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="tata-teleservices">Tata Teleservices</keyword>, which comprises the <keyword id="6711152" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="docomo">DoCoMo</keyword> network and T24 mobile service, posted a net <keyword id="6357392" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="loss">loss</keyword> of ₹275 billion ($4 billion) for the financial year 2017-18 - the largest ever loss in a financial year for an Indian company. In addition, another company in the telecom space, Reliance Communications (not to be confused with Reliance <keyword id="2003276" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Jio">Jio</keyword> Infocomm Ltd), posted the second largest annual loss for an Indian company in 2017-18. The company, which is headed by Anil Ambani, reported a loss of ₹239 billion for the year, after ending its wireless operations and offloading its telecom infrastructure to Jio. The free sale to Airtel Tata Teleservices’ net revenue almost halved in 2017-18 to ₹70 billion as it sold off its wireless business. While the company’s operating loss was a relatively paltry ₹6.6 billion, its huge overall loss is mostly due to the fact that it sold its wireless services business to market leader Airtel in October 2017 for <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/company/corporate-trends/tata-teleservices-to-sell-its-wireless-mobile-business-to-bharti-airtel/articleshow/61051618.cms">absolutely nothing</a>, taking a write-off on the entire unit in the process. The debt-ridden wireless business had been making losses for years on end, which is why Tata was looking to exit the unit completely. The unit was originally a joint venture with NTT Docomo, a Japanese mobile operator, which sold off its 26% stake at a considerable loss in 2014. With the pending sale to Airtel, Tata will be able to offload some of its current spectrum payment obligations. The rest of the business? The future of the remaining parts of Tata Teleservices is not completely certain. In March 2018, the former managing director of Teleservices,Mukund Govind Rajan, mounted a $1 billion bid along with TPG, a private equity firm, for the the parts of the business that were unsold - the enterprise communications and fibre segments. However, Tata Teleservices’ parent, Tata Sons, rejected the bid, saying it would merge the business with Tata Communications, its internet provider subsidiary, instead. This is contingent on the approval of the government, which has a 26% stake in Tata Communications. It will probably not be too keen on forking out a proportional amount (around $260 million) to buy the remaining parts of Teleservices. It is still said to be assessing the merger.

India Inc’s biggest loss now belongs to a telco

The bitter public feud between <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Ratan+Tata&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Ratan Tata</a> and <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Cyrus+Mistry&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Cyrus Mistry</a> is still continuing and recently former <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Tata+Sons&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Tata Sons</a> Chairman Mistry, in a fresh affidavit filed in the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=National+Company+Law+Tribunal&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">National Company Law Tribunal</a>, said Tata saw himself as a "chairman who never retired”. 
 
He said that Tata, by virtue being the chairman of the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Tata+Trusts&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Tata Trusts</a>, always insisted on interfering in all the major decisions. The Trusts owns two-thirds of <keyword id="46894" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Tata-Sons">Tata Sons</keyword>, the group holding company. 
 In the affidavit, Mistry said some of the rules were changed just to ensure that certain decisions were made with the concurrence of the <keyword id="6383155" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Tata-Trusts">Tata Trusts</keyword> and it was insisted that the Trusts nominees on the board must vote in the affirmative on such decisions. 
 
Mistry said he had shared a note on new corporate governance with Tata in August 2016 and placed it with the board a month later as an agenda for its meeting on October 24. 
 
Mistry, to prove the constant interference, claimed it was Tata’s idea to sue joint venture partner <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Docomo&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Docomo</a> for defamation as the Japanese telecom firm was tarnishing the image of the group.

Ratan Tata interferes in all decisions, thinks himself as the chairman who never retired: Cyrus Mistry

New Delhi, Jan 3 () Ratan Tata on Friday filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to quash a company law appellate court order directing Tata Sons to rehire the chairman it had fired in 2016, saying the judgment was "wrong, erroneous and contrary to the record of the case".
His petition is separate from the one filed by Tata Sons Ltd, the holding company of the USD 110 billion salt-to-software conglomerate, in the Supreme Court on Thursday that sought a stay on the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's December 18, 2019 order to reinstate Cyrus Mistry as the chairman.
Ratan Tata, who is chairman emeritus and a shareholder of Tata Sons, in the petition said the NCLAT judgment was wrong as it treats Tata Sons as a two-group company.
Mistry, he contended, was made the Executive Chairman of Tata Sons in a purely professional capacity and not as a representative of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, which holds 18.4 per cent in Tata Sons.
Tata Trusts, of whom Ratan Tata had been a chairman for many years, holds 65.89 per cent of Tata Sons.
The petition said the NCLAT order wrongly suggests that "someone from the SP Group had been a director because of some entrenched right or convention".
"This is untrue and contrary to the records and the articles of association of Tata Sons, which are undisputed and binding on the shareholders including the SP Group," he contended.
He said Mistry's leadership "was lacking" in "his reluctance to timely and meaningfully disassociate himself from his family business after he became the Chairman of Tata Sons and address any conflict in this regard, which was a condition precedent to his appointment as Chairman of Tata Sons".
Mistry, he alleged, "concentrated power and authority in his own hands" and "board members were being alienated on matters relating to Tata Operating Companies where Tata Sons had huge financial exposure and the Board of Tata Sons had to contend with such decisions being cast upon it as fait accompli".
The chairman emeritus targeted Mistry for the handling of the failed partnership with Japan's DoCoMo saying it showed his "complete obstinacy" as he attempted to resist complying with the legal obligations further. "This is not what the Tata Sons brand stands for. Quite to the contrary, honouring its commitments is one of Tata Sons' highest virtues it takes great pride in. Spat with DoCoMo brought ill-repute and reputational losses to Tata Sons."
Ratan Tata said the NCLAT reached a judgment based on "a contrived and self-serving reading of certain correspondence from which it derives erroneous findings which kaleidoscopically portray the larger theme of the judgment on purported oppression and prejudice to the Shapoorji Pallonji Group (SP Group)".
"The Impugned Judgment is also infirm because it blatantly indulges in propagating a selective narrative where relevant facts and records have been glossed over," he said. "The pretense of reasoning and judicial approach is betrayed by omission to consider the record itself."
He said there are no 550 mails between him and Cyrus Mistry as mentioned in the NCLAT judgment. "These mails were between Chairman Emeritus and Chairman Cyrus Mistry and not by entities in Court."
"The whole case of oppression and prejudice is based entirely on words and statements contained in correspondence without there being an iota of evidence to buttress any actual loss/injury being caused to Tata Sons as a result of Cyrus Mistry being forced to act on such interference/interdiction against his wishes," the petition said.
It went on to state that it was "very unfortunate and distressing" that the NCLAT judgment without providing any proper evidence has passed adverse remarks against Ratan Tata who has spent more than half of his life in building the name of the Tata Sons and other Tata operating companies to one of the top global companies.
The judgment creates a wrong legal precedent that is vulnerable to being misused against several companies, including the public sector and government companies, it said. KRH ANZ BAL

You Searched For "Tata Docomo" and got 7 results

Mistry’s war of words with Tatas escalates; says 'mischievous' to suggest he acted on his own on Docomo deal

BI India Bureau

RBI opposes Tata’s decision to pay Docomo over two-year long dispute

BI India Bureau

Tata Teleservices & DoCoMo To Split, Setting Stage For Negotiations Over Valuation

Economic Times

Tata Group May Buy Back NTT Docomo’s Stake In JV

BI India Bureau

India Inc’s biggest loss now belongs to a telco

Dilsher Dhillon

Ratan Tata interferes in all decisions, thinks himself as the chairman who never retired: Cyrus Mistry

BI India Bureau

Ratan Tata moves SC against NCLAT order reinstating Mistry as Tata Sons chairman

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides