The elongated battle between Cyrus Mistry and Tata Sons has spotlighted the rule of majority settled long ago in the Foss v. Harbottle case. Oppression and mismanagement is the idea of administration that has seen huge improvements as of late, and the most compelling motivation has been the court question among Ratan Tata and Cyrus Mistry. The Tata Group had unexpectedly eliminated Mr Mistry from its chairmanship in 2016, and it was anything but a glad goodbye by any means. The Tata Board of Directors takes this strange advance eventually finishes into one of the most scandalous and discussed fights in the Court of the corporate world. This article has been an endeavour to comprehend how the relations between two of the greatest corporate houses weakened with around fifty years of relationship. The fight in the Supreme Court that Mr Cyrus resulted in was not to get back the seat but to make the statement that the minority investors premium is co-broad with larger part investors. Besides, the previous’ advantage can’t be defaced by last as and when they are not in concurrence with one another. This paper attempts to analyze the legal provisions of the oppression and mismanagement in Tata – Mistry Saga and the issues appertain to the prevention by the Companies Act, 2013.
