Noel Tata, Chandrasekaran Set for Closed-Door Meet Ahead of Tata Sons Board Vote

Noel Tata, chairman of Tata Trusts, and N Chandrasekaran, chairman of Tata Sons, are expected to hold discussions ahead of a May 26 Tata Sons board meeting, according to the Economic Times.

The talks follow the group's previous board meeting on February 24, where Noel Tata had raised several concerns and called for a one-on-one conversation with Chandrasekaran.

What Is on the Table

Those concerns included high-risk investments, mounting losses at newer businesses, an exit option for the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) Group — which holds an 18.4% stake in Tata Sons and is seeking to sell it to repay debt — and an assurance that Tata Sons would remain unlisted. Notably, Tata Trusts holds a controlling 66% stake in Tata Sons.

Chandrasekaran is expected to share with Noel Tata the presentations to be made before the board, the report added.

The meeting carries added weight given what the report described as growing strain between the two entities. There had reportedly been no communication between the two chairmen since the February board meeting, and the tension has begun to slow decision-making, delaying key appointments and stalling discussions on strategic matters.

Additionally, that IPO question looms in the background. The RBI may require Tata Sons to list publicly under rules governing upper-layer non-banking finance companies.

A Legal Battle Complicates Matters

This comes after the Tata Trusts governance conflict took a fresh turn on May 15, when the Charity Commissioner of Maharashtra asked the board to defer a meeting scheduled for the following day. Tata Trusts subsequently released a statement acknowledging receipt of the communication, noting that it arrived with no prior notice or hearing. The Trust described the direction as "ex parte" in a statement shared by ANI on X.

The dispute stems from a complaint filed by advocate Katyayani Agrawal, alleging that three of the six trustees of Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT) are permanent trustees, potentially in violation of amendments to the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The 2025 amendment caps perpetual trustees at one-fourth of the total number of trustees in a public trust.

Tata Trusts has maintained that the amended provisions are prospective in nature and do not apply to appointments made before September 1, 2025, a position it says is backed by legal opinions. It also noted that a related writ petition filed by Agrawal to restrain the same board meeting was dismissed as withdrawn by the Bombay High Court on May 13.

The Commissioner's direction also referenced a separate complaint allegedly filed by trustee Venu Srinivasan. Tata Trusts said it was unaware of any such complaint until it received the Commissioner's communication, and pointed out that Srinivasan had earlier acknowledged notices for both the original May 8 board meeting and the rescheduled May 16 meeting.