Chief Justice Of India Sharad Arvind Bobde, who headed the bench hearing the high-stake Tata-Mistry case on Monday, disclosed that his advocate son Shrinivas Bobde has been representing the Shapoorji Pallonji Group’s subsidiary company for about two years in a slum redevelopment issue.
The top court is hearing cross-appeals filed by Tata Sons and Cyrus Investments against the order of the NCLAT appeal tribunal that reinstated Cyrus Mistry as the executive chairman of the Tata conglomerate of more than USD 100 billion salt-to-software.
The lawyers appearing for both Tata Group and SP Group were asked by the Chief Justice and Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian if they had any objections to the disclosure.
Senior advocates Harish Salve, representing SP Party, appearing for Tatas and CA Sundaram, said they have no opposition to the bench hearing the matter headed by the Chief Justice, which continued for the fourth day.
Over the weekend, I learned that my son in Bombay has been appearing for about two years in a slum reconstruction problem for a subsidiary of the SP Group. In the event that any of you have any objections to this court hearing the case, I thought of disclosing it to the parties, the Chief Justice of India said.
Mr. Salve said that he had even appeared in the same case and that he had no opposition to the case being heard by the CJI-led bench. Mr. Sundaram also agreed with Mr. Salve and said that all of them seem to be for some business or others, and he has no objection either.
Statement Of Chief Justice Of India
The Chief Justice of India said that these days, at a later point, such problems could theoretically cause problems.
In its order, on Monday, when the matter was referred to the hearing, the Court told the Bar that Shrinivas Bobde, a learned lawyer, had been appearing on behalf of a subsidiary company of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group in Mumbai in a slum rehabilitation case for a period of approximately two years.
It said, “Senior counsel/counsel appearing for the parties’ viz., Harish N. Salve, A.M. Singhvi, C.A. Sundaram, Mohan Parasaran, Shyam Divan, Fereshte D. Sethna, etc., have stated that they have no objection to this Court deciding the present matters.”
