The long-standing differences within Tata Trusts appear to be easing, with signs of reconciliation among trustees. According to a report by Hindu Business Line, Mehli Mistry, who had reportedly opposed the appointment of Venu Srinivasan as a trustee for life, responded positively to his mail, hinting that the dispute was never about egos but about the lack of transparency.
“Dear Venu, it has always been our intention to work harmoniously together! The only problem earlier was the lack of required information requested by us, which you all nominated directors have agreed to provide. We must bury the past, respect each other and move forward as a team unanimously! That’s what Ratan would have expected to do,” Mistry wrote in his mail to Srinivasan.
The reply of Mistry was on Srinivasan’s mail who had written to fellow trustees on October 21, thanking them for their confidence and calling for unity. “My dear fellow trustees, thank you very much for the confidence reposed in me, and for the kind words that have been expressed. I sincerely hope we will now work harmoniously,” Srinivasan said in his email, according to BusinessLine.
All eyes now on Mehli Mistry’s term renewal at Tata Trusts
However, The Economic Times report states in his letter to the board, Mistry gave a conditional approval for the reappointment of Venu Srinivasan as trustee and vice chairman of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust. He sought that all future trustee renewals should be approved unanimously and if any future resolution for reappointment is not unanimous, his approval for Srinivasan’s reappointment would be withdrawn. This condition will apply on his own renewal as well.
“For the avoidance of doubt, should any trustee elect not to pass this resolution reappointing Venu Srinivasan, or an identical unanimous resolution for all other trustees as and when their respective tenures expire, then in such event, I do not provide my formal approval for the reappointment of Venu Srinivasan. Needless to say, I do not expect such a situation to arise,” Mehli’s response stated.
Srinivasan was reappointed ahead of his term expiring on October 23, and the focus now shifts to the reappointment of Mistry, whose term ends on October 28.
The other issue of the conflict was the listing of Tata Sons The report by Business Line reported that both camps, however, agree not to go public.
Core issue was lack of information
The report noted that at the heart of the dispute is the flow of information between trustees nominated to the Tata Sons board and the rest of the Trust board. The dissenting trustees allege that key decisions taken at the tata sons board were not shared with them, as required under Article 121A of TSPL’s Articles of Association.
According to Business Line, the trustees pointed to two key examples — the €3.8 billion acquisition of Italian automaker Iveco by Tata Motors, and a Rs 1,000 crore funding to Tata International. They claim these were approved without proper communication to the Trust board.
The opposing group also raised concerns over conflict of interest, noting that Noel Tata, who chairs several Tata group companies including Tata International, Trent, Voltas, and Tata Investment Corporation, also serves as a Trust nominee on the Tata sons board.
“How can you as the owner (representative of Tata Trusts) sitting on the board (TSPL) vote as director along with the board on a Rs 1,000 crore funding resolution related to a company (Tata International) where you’re Chairman and also approve it as a trust nominee?” asked a person close to one of the trustees.