Mistry pitches for Tata holdco to go public Shapoor Mistry, chairman of the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) Group and the largest minority shareholder in Tata Sons, has again called for the public listing of the Tata Group’s holding company, arguing that it is a necessary step to unlock value for stakeholders and enhance the income of the Tata Trusts. This latest push comes amid growing pressure from two Tata Trusts vice chairmen, Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh, who have also advocated for a public listing. The call aligns with the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) proposed draft classification norms for upper-layer non-banking financial companies (NBFCs), which could influence the decision. Mistry, who previously urged a listing in October 2025, reiterated his stance, emphasizing that the move would strengthen corporate governance, transparency, and accountability. Mistry’s argument centers on the idea that a public listing would not harm the interests of the Tata Trusts, which hold about two-thirds of Tata Sons’ equity. He claimed there is “no clear, evidence-based case” to suggest that going public would “materially damage” the trusts or reduce their ability to serve beneficiaries. The SP Group, which owns an 18.4% stake in Tata Sons, has pledged its entire holding as collateral to refinance debt totaling Rs 55,000-60,000 crore. Mistry argued that a listing would alleviate financial pressures on SP, which has been grappling with refinancing obligations. The push for a public listing follows a missed deadline by Tata Sons to meet the RBI’s September 30, 2025, deadline for upper-layer NBFCs to comply with classification norms. The RBI’s draft framework, which aims to regulate the financial risks of large NBFCs, has intensified calls for structural changes within the Tata Group.#reserve_bank_of_india #tata_trusts #tata_sons #shapoor_mistry #shapoorji_pallonji_group
Tata Sons Listing Debate Intensifies as Vijay Singh Backs IPO Push The debate over whether Tata Sons, the principal shareholder of Tata Group companies, should be listed on the stock exchanges through an initial public offering (IPO) has intensified, with senior trustee Vijay Singh publicly supporting the move. The discussion comes amid growing internal divisions within the Tata Trusts, which has historically maintained the company’s private status. Singh, a former Defence Secretary and long-time board member of Tata Sons, argued that the company’s expanding capital-intensive ventures now necessitate a reevaluation of its current stance. His comments, reported by The Indian Express, highlight the growing pressure on the trust to align with regulatory requirements and market demands. Tata Sons, which operates under the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) upper-layer non-banking financial company (NBFC) framework, is required to list its shares under existing regulations. Singh emphasized that the company’s role in driving national projects—such as steel, locomotives, power, and infrastructure—has expanded into sectors like aviation, defence, semiconductors, batteries, and electronics. These industries demand significant capital, which Singh argued can only be partially sourced internally. “Listing has become necessary to fund such projects,” he stated, noting that the company’s value has quadrupled over the past decade and requires greater transparency and regulatory oversight. The push for an IPO has drawn mixed reactions from key figures within the Tata Trusts. Noel Tata, the chairman of the trust, has reportedly favored keeping Tata Sons private, while former chairman Ratan Tata was also opposed to the idea.#reserve_bank_of_india #rbi #tata_trusts #vijay_singh #tata_sons
Appointments open to challenge: Tata Trusts Mumbai: Objections raised by former trustee Mehli Mistry to the appointments of Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh—non-Zoroastrians and non-Mumbai residents—to the board of the Bai Hirabai J N Tata Navsari Charitable Institution have triggered a governance debate over whether restrictive clauses in the trust deed remain enforceable, despite a prior legal opinion that deemed them invalid under the law. In an internal email on Tuesday, Tata Trusts CEO Siddharth Sharma stated that "irrespective of the legal opinion and past precedent," the appointments of non-Zoroastrians remained open to challenge under the deed's provisions, adding that he and chairman Noel Tata believed "a legal opinion per se does not substitute for a judicial pronouncement." Sharma's note, seen by The Times of India, appears to reinforce Mistry's objections, underscoring that the appointments of non-Zoroastians and non-Mumbai residents could be questioned under the trust deed. The Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, to whom Mistry has escalated his objections, has not yet served notice or issued summons to the trustees of Bai Hirabai. Mistry has also sought sworn declarations from all trustees—including those who are Zoroastrians—affirming their eligibility under the trust deed. Citing the deed in his objections, Mistry stated: "If any trustee ceases to profess the Zoroastrian faith, he shall cease to be a trustee, as if he were 'dead'." This assertion highlights the contentious nature of the trust's provisions, which require trustees to be Zoroastrians and residents of Mumbai. The dispute centers on the interpretation of the trust deed's clauses, which were previously challenged in a legal opinion that found them to be "bad in law.#tata_trusts #venu_srinivasan #mehli_mistry #maharashtra_charity_commissioner #vijay_singh
Venu Srinivasan resigns from Hirabai Tata Trust after Mehli Mistry challenges his eligibility Venu Srinivasan, the senior-most vice-chairman of the Tata Trusts and a director on Tata Sons’ board, has resigned from the Hirabai Tata Trust following a dispute with former trustee Mehli Mistry. Mistry had petitioned the Charity Commissioner to challenge Srinivasan’s and another vice chairman, Vijay Singh’s, eligibility to serve on the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution, arguing they are not Parsis. Srinivasan’s resignation came hours after reports surfaced about the petition, which could have broader implications for over a dozen entities within the Tata Trusts ecosystem. Mistry’s petition also questioned his own removal from the trusts in October 2025, claiming that the votes cast by Srinivasan and Singh—whom he alleged were ineligible—should be invalidated. Mistry had previously filed a similar petition in November 2025 but withdrew it within a week, stating he no longer had interest in the trusts. Srinivasan, who stepped down from the Navsari-based trust on Saturday, cited “preoccupation with other business commitments” as the reason for his resignation. Earlier this week, he assumed the role of chairman and managing director of Sundaram Clayton following a family split within the TVS Group. The Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution, established in 1923 by Sir Ratanji Tata, focuses on the welfare of the Parsi community in Navsari, Gujarat, particularly in education and healthcare. It is part of the broader Tata Trusts network, which includes the Sir Ratan Tata Trust, one of the two principal trusts controlling a majority stake in Tata Sons.#tata_trusts #venu_srinivasan #mehli_mistry #maharashtra_charity_commissioner
Amid Mehli’s challenge, Venu quits a Tata trust TVS Motor chairman emeritus Venu Srinivasan has resigned from the board of the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution (BHI), citing his focus on business operations. The move follows a legal challenge by former BHI trustee Mehli Mistry, who accused non-Zoroastrian trustees of violating the trust’s 1923 deed. Mistry’s petition to the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner argued that the trust’s founding document explicitly barred non-Zoroastrians and non-Mumbai residents from serving as trustees. This restriction applies only to BHI, unlike the other nine Tata Trusts, where Srinivasan continues to hold positions. Srinivasan’s resignation from BHI was confirmed by sources, though he did not respond to inquiries about the matter. Current trustees include Noel Tata, Jimmy Tata, Jehangir Jehangir, Darius Khambata, and Vijay Singh, a former defence secretary. Singh’s stance on Mistry’s petition remains unclear, as he declined to comment. Mistry contended that both Srinivasan and Singh lack Zoroastrian faith and permanent Mumbai residency, disqualifying them under the 1923 deed. He sought affidavits from all trustees to confirm compliance with eligibility criteria, emphasizing that any unqualified trustees could force the BHI board to fall below the minimum five-member requirement. Mistry’s legal arguments extended to claiming that Srinivasan and Singh’s appointments were void from the start, rendering their actions as trustees legally invalid. He alleged that their votes against his trusteeship extension constituted fraud and criminal breach of trust, potentially violating the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2024, and the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.#venu_srinivasan #mehli_mistry #bhi #tata_trusts #swapnil_kothari
