The Tata Sons board meeting on Tuesday comes at a time when the Tata Group is facing its biggest internal churn since the Cyrus Mistry era, but this time the tensions are unfolding within Tata Trusts itself.
The fault lines inside the Tata Group go beyond personalities. At the heart of the conflict, matters are about how much authority Tata Trusts should exercise over Tata Sons and whether the old consensus-driven structure of the group is beginning to fracture.
The meeting assumes added significance because it follows months of postponed discussions, trustee infighting, board-level disagreements and the dramatic exit of Mehli Mistry, one of Ratan Tata’s closest confidants, from the Trusts’ structure.
Also Read: Tata Sons IPO- Why former Tata veteran Soonawala is warning against listing the conglomerate
Here is how the developments unfolded.
How Ratan Tata’s death changed the power structure
The current phase inside the Tata Group began after the death of Ratan Tata.
Soon after, Noel Tata, Ratan's half-brother, took over as chairman of Tata Trusts, the philanthropic entities that collectively own around 66% of Tata Sons, while construction and infrastructure conglomerate SP Group holds 18.4% of the company. With Ratan Tata gone, several important decisions that were earlier managed through consensus began moving through formal trustee discussions.
Around the same time, Tata Trusts introduced a governance mechanism under which nominee directors above the age of 75 would undergo annual performance reviews. That set the stage for the first major disagreement within the trusts structure.
Dispute erupts over Tata Sons board representation
The tensions became visible during a Tata Trusts meeting held to discuss the continuation of Vijay Singh as a nominee director on the Tata Sons board.
Also Read: Why Tata Sons is facing pressure to go public | An explainer
Trustees Mehli Mistry, Darius Khambata, Pramit Jhaveri and Jehangir Jehangir opposed Singh’s continuation and instead backed Mehli Mistry for a Tata Sons board role.
During the discussions, some trustees raised concerns about transparency and information flow between Tata Sons and Tata Trusts. ET had reported that there were questions over whether nominee directors were adequately updating trustees on important board-level matters.
Noel Tata and Venu Srinivasan opposed replacing nominee directors mid-term and argued that appointments should follow an institutional process.
The meeting ended without consensus.
The Mehli Mistry remarks that exposed the divide
According to the minutes of the meeting in September, Mehli Mistry told trustees he was “dismayed” that Noel Tata had not backed his candidature despite his support during earlier leadership discussions involving Noel Tata.
The episode highlighted the growing divisions within Tata Trusts after Ratan Tata’s death.
ET also reported that some trustees believed Tata Trusts needed a stronger voice within Tata Sons because of larger strategic issues confronting the group, including governance questions and the future of Tata Sons’ unlisted status.
The conflict deepened a month later when Mehli Mistry’s continuation as trustee came up for renewal.
Noel Tata, Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh were unlikely to support his extension, effectively ending his tenure at Tata Trusts.
The development was significant because trustee appointments at Tata Trusts had historically been made unanimously.
The Mehli Mistry episode became the clearest sign yet that internal alignment within the trusts structure had changed.
Governance concerns widen
Over the following months, discussions within Tata Trusts widened beyond board representation.
There were debates around the role of nominee directors, communication between Tata Sons and Tata Trusts, governance structures, and whether Tata Sons should remain an unlisted private company.
The listing issue gained importance because Tata Sons’ upper-layer NBFC classification had earlier revived regulatory discussions around a possible IPO.
At the same time, the Tata Group was also investing heavily into Air India, semiconductors, electronics manufacturing and digital businesses.
Chandrasekaran’s third-term decision gets deferred
The focus then shifted to Tata Sons itself. A February 2026 Tata Sons board meeting was expected to clear N Chandrasekaran’s third term as chairman. Instead, the matter was deferred after discussions around losses in new businesses, debt levels and capital allocation.
According to an ET Bureau report, Noel Tata raised concerns around Air India’s losses and investments into newer ventures.
Chandrasekaran himself suggested postponing the discussion to ensure broader alignment between Tata Sons and Tata Trusts. That postponement added to speculation around further differences within the Tata structure.
The repeated postponements that followed
Several important Tata Trusts meetings and governance discussions were subsequently postponed over the next few months.
Delays were reported around trustee matters, board nominations and governance-related discussions amid continuing internal differences. One of the key meetings postponed was an early May 2026 Tata Trusts meeting that was expected to discuss governance issues, legal challenges and trustee appointments. ET reported that the postponement came amid ongoing disagreements and litigation linked to governance matters within the trusts ecosystem.
What is unfolding at today’s Tata Sons board meeting
While Tuesday's meeting is not expected to revisit Chandrasekaran’s third term, the focus is on broader strategic concerns around group investments.
The meeting comes after reports that Tata Group’s unlisted businesses posted losses of Rs 10,905 crore in FY25 and that the figure could rise further.
Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran opened the meeting with detailed presentations on the performance, future growth plans and capital requirements of businesses including aviation, electronics and digital ventures. The exercise is aimed at addressing concerns raised by Noel Tata during the previous Tata Sons board meeting in February.
People familiar with the matter told ET Bureau, the presentations are focused on the relationship between capital allocation and business outcomes across emerging businesses, with Chandrasekaran outlining the long-term investment rationale behind the group’s newer bets.
The meeting is also significant because it is the first time a special Tata Sons board meeting has been convened primarily to present a detailed business review in response to concerns raised by the chairman of Tata Trusts.
The discussions are also being closely watched because they come after nearly 18 months of governance-related tensions inside the Tata ecosystem following Ratan Tata’s death.
