Mehli Mistry, a trustee of the Tata Education and Development Trust (TEDT), has objected to using the trust's Rs 5,000 crore corpus for legal expenses related to the dispute between Tata Trusts and the Tata Sons Board over N Chandrasekaran's reappointment.

Mehli Mistry, a trustee of the Tata Education and Development Trust (TEDT), has objected to the possible use of funds from TEDT’s corpus, reportedly estimated at Rs 5,000 crore, towards legal expenses arising from the dispute between Tata Trusts and the majority of the Tata Sons Board over N Chandrasekaran’s reappointment as Chairman of Tata Sons.

In an email sent by Mehli to Tata Trusts CEO Siddhartha Sharma and ‘CC’d’ to Tata Trusts Chairman Noel N Tata and fellow TEDT trustee JN Mistry, viewed by ANI, Mehli said TEDT would not bear any part of the legal expenses relating to the dispute.

“I am saddened to read about the litigation between Trustees, Tata Sons and Tata Trusts. This has been unprecedented over the past 150 years!” he said. Mehli said he did not want to comment on the experience or attitude of those involved but made his position clear on TEDT bearing the legal expenses.

“While I do not want to comment on the experience and attitude of people, I want to make it abundantly clear that TEDT will not pay any part of legal expenses towards these created disputes. TEDT is not a Tata Sons shareholder, and therefore, in that respect, stands isolated from these disputes,” the Trustee said. He asked that his email be tabled and recorded at the next TEDT Board of Trustees meeting scheduled for November 20, 2026.

Objection Amid Reappointment Dispute

Mehli’s email does not say that TEDT funds are currently being used for the dispute or that any such expenditure has been proposed. His objection is based on his apprehension that TEDT could be called upon to bear such legal expenses.

The objection comes against the backdrop of the dispute between Tata Trusts and Tata Sons over Chandrasekaran’s reappointment as Executive Chairman.

Chandrasekaran had informed the Tata Sons Board on August 12 that he would not offer himself for reappointment when his current term ends on February 20, 2027. The Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT) subsequently said it respected his decision, and its trustees resolved to initiate the setting up of a Selection Committee under the Articles of Association to recommend a new Chairman.

Board Vote and Trust's Reaction

The process was overtaken on September 17 when the Tata Sons Board approved Chandrasekaran’s reappointment for another five years in a 4:1 vote. Noel Tata voted against the resolution.

Tata Trusts subsequently maintained that the resolution was a “legal nullity”, citing the provisions of the Tata Sons Articles of Association (AoA) concerning the role of the Trusts’ nominee directors. The Trusts have maintained that the succession process should continue.

The dispute has placed the Tata Trusts’ position as the majority shareholder of Tata Sons at the centre of the disagreement with the company’s Board over Chandrasekaran’s continuation.

Shareholding and Trust Roles

The Tata Trusts collectively hold around 66 per cent of the equity share capital of Tata Sons. The two principal Tata Trusts account for more than half of Tata Sons’ equity between them. SDTT holds 27.98 per cent, while the Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT) holds 23.56 per cent, taking their combined holding to 51.54 per cent. Other allied Tata trusts account for the remaining portion of the collective Tata Trusts holding.

SDTT’s role is relevant to the present dispute because its trustees had initiated the process for identifying Chandrasekaran’s successor after he said he would not seek another term. TEDT, meanwhile, is an allied trust under SRTT. Mehli has specifically stated in his email that TEDT is not a Tata Sons shareholder and, on that basis, stands isolated from the dispute.

Disagreement Over Tata Sons' Future Ownership

The dispute over Chandrasekaran’s reappointment has also coincided with a separate disagreement over the future ownership structure of Tata Sons. The Tata Trusts said on September 17 that they had not agreed to the listing of Tata Sons and called for options other than listing to be explored. The Trusts said all available options should be examined and assessed before a decision is taken. The Trusts also reiterated their position on retaining Tata Sons as an unlisted company and referred to the role of its charitable majority ownership. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianetnews Editorial staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)