Darius J Khambata, Board member of Tata Trusts|Picture Credit: THE HINDU
Insinuations that the Mehli Mistry-led group of trustees on the Board of Tata Trusts had actually tried a coup or takeover on September 11, 2025 are “unreasonable,” board member and life trustee Darius J Khambata composed in a current letter to the Board of the Tata Trusts.
Khambata included that neither did he nor anybody else have any objective to perform such an act, nor did they “even from another location recommend this.” Keeping in mind that what was included was “a distinction of technique” on the concern of “representation of the Trusts through its candidate Directors on the board of Tata Sons,” he included, “That representation is a task to the Trusts, not a reward.”
In his letter, dated November 10 and examined byThe HinduKhambata did nevertheless acknowledge that “a higher effort at creating an agreement must have been made by all,” describing the split in the Tata Trusts Board.
The occasions of September 11, 2025, related to a board vote on whether Vijay Singh (77) ought to continue as a candidate director on the board of Tata Sons, the holding business of the Tata Group.
The vote had actually ended up being required following the intro of a guideline, following the death of Ratan Tata, that needed the yearly reappointment of candidates above the age of 75.
‘Pained over coup insinuation’
The debate over a supposed ‘coup’ emerged since the vote– normally a consentaneous one– was beat, with 4 members opposing Singh’s renewal. The 4 to vote versus the renewal were Mehli Mistry, Pramit Jhaveri, Jehangir HC Jehangir, and Khambata.
“The occasions of the previous couple of weeks have distressed me: especially the spin doctored media story,” Khambata composed in his letter.
“What has hurt me the most is the insinuation that the occasions of our conference of 11 September, 2025, symbolized some sort of “coup” or “takeover,” Khambata included. “This is unreasonable. I had no such objective and I think neither did anybody else. Absolutely nothing we did even from another location recommends this.”
At the heart of the problem in between the 2 camps was a disagreement on how the governance of the Tata Trusts must be carried out, and on the representation of the Trusts through their candidate directors on the board of Tata Sons.
The trustees led by Tata Trusts Chairman Noel Tata, Venu Srinivasan and Singh, were supposedly of the viewpoint that governance ought to continue as it up until now has actually been done: through connection and consensus-based decision-making. The trustees led by Mistry, nevertheless, felt in a different way.
“It [the vote of September 11] was a distinction of technique in a yearly evaluation worrying representation of the Trusts through its candidate Directors on the board of Tata Sons,” Khambata composed. “On 11 September, I was inspired by one element and one element alone– viz to have a more assertive voice on the board of Tata Sons to assist embrace the reason for the Trusts versus listing of Tata Sons.”
No difficult sensations
Khambata went on to describe that the trustees who had actually voted versus the extension of Singh as a Tata Sons board member “felt definitely nothing” versus Singh and “was sorry for that he was not present at the conference so that we might describe our position to him, deal with to deal with.”
He likewise stated he was sorry for the “unreasonable slant media protection” provided to the episode and the “following discomfort” Singh needed to bear. Khambata went on to compose, following the occasions of September 11, he two times proposed a joint declaration of unity declaring all the trustees’ faith in Noel Tata’s management.
“The very first time was nearly right away after 11 September and the second was the day before Ratan’s death anniversary,” Khambata composed. “Unfortunately a few of you did not react.”
He even more stated that all the trustees and the Trust itself had actually been harmed by the “crafted media protection,” including that he was dissatisfied by the “failure of the Trusts to fix this essentially incorrect story.”
Restating his method of acting “separately and in the interests of the Trusts on a concern by concern basis,” Khambata remembered disagreeing with Mistry on “basic problems such as providing the SP group a reasonable exit (which I believed was important to the interests of the Trusts) and on private trustees interacting with Tata Sons (which I thought was impermissible). He included: “Of course Mehli later on accepted the resolution which I proposed and which was passed in July 2025, articulating opposition to listing as not in the Trusts interests and at the exact same time stating that the Trusts must look for a settlement with the SP Group.”
Progressing
Another indication of stress within the board of trustees was the reality that Tata, Singh, and Srinivasan had actually not authorized the reappointment of Mistry when time came for a vote on the problem. Mistry’s three-year period ended on October 28, following which he composed a letter (November 4, 2025) to Tata that concluded: “I part methods with a quote that Ratan N. Tata utilized to state to me. ‘Nobody is larger than the organization it serves.'”
While concluding his own letter, Khambata kept in mind that Mistry had actually put the interests of the Trusts above his individual interest in his “dignified and good letter.”
“We ought to all set our individual sensations aside and work unitedly in the interests of the Trusts and in service of the excellent Tata tradition,” Khambata stated. “That is the incredible duty vested in us.”
Released on November 21, 2025
