Last year in September, shareholders of Tata Sons had voted in favour of turning it into a private limited company despite opposition by Mistry's family, which is the single largest shareholder of the holding company.
In his interim argument, the counsel appearing for Mistry asked for a stay on the conversion.
"I seek to stay on the conversion," he appealed before the two-member bench of the NCLAT.
Senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Tata Sons, stated that "the company has always been a private company for 101 years".
It was later "deemed to be a public company in 1976" as per regulatory requirement, he told the bench.
After listening to the arguments of both the parties, the bench asked Tata Sons to file an affidavit and all related documents on conversion by coming Friday.
On July 9, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai had dismissed Mistry's pleas challenging his removal as Tata Sons chairman as also the allegations of rampant misconduct on part of Ratan Tata and the company's board.
NCLT held that the board of directors at Tata Sons was "competent" to remove the executive chairperson of the company.
NCLT bench members B S V Prakash Kumar and V Nallasenapathy said that Mistry was ousted as chairman because the Tata Sons' board and its majority shareholders had "lost confidence in him".
Under the Companies Act 2013, an order of NCLT can be challenged before the NCLAT.
Mistry, who was the sixth chairman of Tata Sons, was ousted from the position in October 2016. He had taken over as the chairman in 2012 after Ratan Tata announced his retirement.
Two months after his removal, Mistry's family-run firms Cyrus Investments Pvt Ltd and Sterling Investments Corp approached the NCLT as minority shareholders, against Tata Sons, Ratan Tata, and some other board members.
Mistry in his pleas primarily argued that his removal was not in accordance with the Companies Act and that there was rampant mismanagement of affairs across Tata Sons.
He also alleged that Tata Trust chairperson Ratan Tata and trustee N Soonawala interfered with the day-to-day operations of the group companies, they acted as shadow directors, and all of the above caused massive revenue loss for the group.
The Tata Group had denied all charges and said Mistry was removed because the board had lost confidence in him.
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.