Mumbai, July 9 : In a significant ruling, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Monday upheld the October 24, 2016 decision of the Tata Sons Board of Directors dismissing its then Chairman Cyrus Mistry, a company official said here, which Mistry's office termed as "disappointing".

The NCLT ruled that the Tata Sons board of directors was competent to remove the executive Chairman and that Mistry was ejected as the board members had lost confidence in him.

Rejecting Mistry's plea to reinstate him on the Board of Tata Sons, the NCLT pointed out that he (Mistry) had openly gone against the Board, and hence against the company.

"The ruling of the National Company Law Tribunal is disappointing although not surprising. We will continue to strive for ensuring good governance and protection of interests of minority shareholders and all stakeholders in Tata Sons from the wilful brute rule of the majority," office of Cyrus Mistry said in a statement.

The much-awaited verdict of NCLT Mumbai by a Special Bench comprising B. S. V. Prakash Kumar and V. Nallasenapathy came in a petition filed by Mistry after he was abruptly ousted as the Tata Sons Chairman that day (2016), creating an upheaval in the Indian corporate world.

Mistry later quit from the board of six other Tata Group companies but challenged the Group and his successor, the former Interim Chairman Ratan Tata's decisions, before the NCLT.

The petitioners, Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd and Sterling Investments Group of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group had filed the plea against the Tata Sons directors and trustees of Tata Trusts, alleging among other things, abuse of articles of association by outsiders, breakdown of governance and loss of ethical values.

"The ruling is in line with the earlier position expressed by the Tribunal. An appeal on merits will be pursued. Matters like TTSL, Air Asia, recovery of dues from Siva, non-closure of a loss-making Nano, a struggling resolution of Tata Steel Europe, all present serious issues that will be pursued. Not only the facts that were under consideration but also subsequent facts and developments that continue to evidence oppression and mismanagement will be under scrutiny and will be pursued in full earnest," the official statement from Mistry's office said.

"Ours has always been a principled fight to restore the Tata Group to its glorious days of high standards, best practices and most importantly, the best value systems. In this journey, no matter how hard it may seem, as shareholders who have always supported the Tata Group, it remains our duty to protect the Tata Group from those were destroying value and making the Group vulnerable to external forces," it added.

Official sources indicated on Monday that Mistry is likely to challenge the NCLT verdict before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

They further contended that Mistry was sacked as Chairman and later as Tata Sons director as a result of "oppression by promoters who are in turn owned by Tata Trusts that owns over 68 per cent in Tata Sons".

The petition also listed how the Articles of Association were violated and misused "to give powers to the majority shareholders to subvert the interests of the minority shareholders and interests of the company."

Alleging massive revenue losses for the Group owing to the alleged mismanagement by Tata Sons board and Ratan Tata, the petition pointed to Ratan Tata's relationship with C. Sivasankaran and his companies, provided them aex-gratia favours' without there being any aquid pro quo' for the Tata shareholders or their group companies, and sought a forensic audit into such dealings.

Similar allegations were on the transactions with Mehli Mistry and Tata Power, resulting in an unjust enrichment of some entities and sought a forensic audit into these financial deals, and referring the findings to the Ministriy of Company Affairs' Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO).

Accusing Tata Trusts trustees, Ratan Tata and Lord Kumar Bhattacharya of regularly reviewing the operations of various Tata Group companies though not being directors in any, the petition claimed violation of Insider Trading Rules by giving them access to price sensitive information.

A similar demand was made for forensic audit into the alleged fraudulent transactions of Rs.22 crore between Deloitte Haskins & Co, with Air Asia India with non-existent parties in India and Singapore.

Contending another example of oppression by Mistry, the petition claimed that during the course of the NCLT hearing, the Tata Sons board sought to convert it into a private company.

However, the NCLT dismissed all the allegations and rejected Mistry's plea to reinstate him on the Tata Sons Board.

Arguing for the Tata Group, its counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the NCLT that Mistry was appointed at the behest of Tata Trusts and his removal cannot be questioned by minority shareholders and he was removed as per provisions of the law by seven out of nine directors in which Mistry did not vote for his removal and one director abstained.

Singhvi argued that Mistry was removed because the Tata Sons Board had lost confidence in him, as he had intentionally and in bad faith, "leaked sensitive and confidential information" which eroded Tata Group's market value.

Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



New Delhi: A Noida-based private University, Galgotias has come under severe criticism after allegedly showcasing a china-made robotic dog at the India AI Impact Summit 2026 in New Delhi.

Social media users accused the university of purchasing a commercial robot from China and presenting it as its own creation at the summit.

Reports claimed that the university showcased the Unitree Go2 robotic dog, an AI-powered device available on Chinese platforms for Rs 2–3 lakh, under the name “Orion” during the event in New Delhi.

“So Galgotia university purchased a commercially available robot worth Rs 2.5 lakhs, called it their own and passed it off in the Delhi AI Summit as a part of their 350 crore AI ecosystem..I literally have no words left,” wrote ‘X’ user Roshan Rai, sharing a video in which a DD News reporter interviewed a university official about the robotic dog.

The viral post claimed that the robot closely resembles Unitree Go2, a quadruped robotic dog developed by Chinese company Unitree Robotics.

Screenshots attached to the post compared the robot displayed at the summit with the Unitree Go2 listing, priced at roughly 2,800 dollars (around Rs 2.3–2.5 lakhs).

According Unitree Robotics, The Unitree Go2 is widely used as a programmable quadruped robot for research, education, inspection, and development purposes, and is a common learning platform in universities and robotics labs worldwide.

Several users reiterated the claim.

Government of India funds for filing patents

Meanwhile, concerns were raised about alleged misuse of government funds.

User @sky_phd highlighted, “Galgotias University is once again in the spotlight. Under the guise of research and innovation, they are raking in plenty of money.”

The user claimed that the university took money under government funds, and wrote, “The Government of India provides incentive funding of up to five lakh rupees for filing patents.”

“To understand the patent filing process and the games being played with it, take a look at the list of top Indian institutions filing patents. All the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) together file only 803 patents, while institutions like Lovely Professional University, Jain Deemed-to-be University, Galgotias University, and Teerthanker Mahaveer University have filed more than a thousand patents each,” the user wrote, sharing a chart of patent filings by these universities.

“The basic international patent filing fee is $285–400. Through patent filings alone, these institutions are reportedly earning more than fifty crore rupees annually. However, while these universities file patents, they often do not pursue them further, and most patents ultimately do not get granted. This inflates filing numbers but does not reflect real innovation or recognized intellectual property,” the user added.

Another user pointed out about the selection criteria of the summit. The user questioned, “What exactly was the selection criteria for participation in this AI summit? .”

“Platforms meant to showcase India’s innovation should represent genuine research, original ideas, and credible institutions. So how did Galgotias University qualify to display a Chinese-made robot and present it as its own “innovation”? If true, this isn’t just embarrassing, it undermines the credibility of the entire summit and of India’s growing tech ecosystem. At a time when India is trying to position itself as a global AI and deep-tech leader, showcasing repackaged imports as indigenous innovation only damages trust. If we want the world to take India’s AI ambitions seriously, transparency and authenticity must come first,” the user added.

 

University clarifies after backlash

In response to the criticism, Galgotias University issued a clarification, stating that it “never claimed to have built the device” and that the robot was procured from a Chinese manufacturer for academic purposes.

“Let us be clear, Galgotias has not built this robodog, nor have we claimed to do so. What we are building are minds that will soon design, engineer, and manufacture such technologies in Bharat," the university said.

The university in its statement also pointed out that the Unitree Go2 is being used as a learning tool for students.

“From the US to China and Singapore, we bring advanced technologies to campus because exposure creates vision, and vision creates creators. The robodog is actively being used by students to test capabilities and explore real-world applications,” the university added.

University professor claims “it's developed by the Center of Excellence at the Galgotias University.”

In another video captured by DD News, a reporter showcased the Galgotias University pavilion at the India AI Impact Summit 2026.

At the pavilion, the reporter spoke with the university professor about the technology on display.

The professor introduced the robot, saying, “This is Orion. You need to meet Orion. It has been developed by the Center of Excellence at Galgotias University.”

She added, “I would also like to brief you about Galgotias University. We are the first private university investing more than Rs 350 crore in artificial intelligence and have a dedicated data science and AI lab on campus.”

“Orion has been developed by our Center of Excellence. It can take all shapes and sizes and is quite playful. It can perform small tasks such as surveillance and monitoring. It can even execute movements like moonwalks and somersaults,” she explained.

She also claimed that, “This is India’s first iOS lab in North India at a university, giving our students hands-on experience with cutting-edge technology.”

Reacting to the video social media users ridiculed the 350 cr rupees investment compared to the china made robo dog.

Past Controversies of the University

This is not the first time the university is in controversy. In May 2024, during the Lok Sabha elections, a video went viral showing students protesting outside the Congress headquarters in New Delhi against the party’s manifesto. The footage, captured by Aaj Tak, showed students struggling to articulate the purpose of their protest, raising questions about the demonstration’s intent.

Earlier, in 2017, students protested against the university management after being barred from appearing in exams due to low attendance, with allegations that fines were requested to allow attendance, a claim denied by the administration.