Tata Trusts trustee Khambata dubs reports of ‘coup’ or ‘takeover’ as ‘absurd’

Khambata’s missive comes in the backdrop of a growing perception that he, Pramit Jhaveri, Mehli Mistry and Jehangir were acting in concert, and that they were against Noel Tata and other trustees (Vijay Singh and Venu Srinivasan). The Mehli Mistry bloc had opposed the nomination of Vijay Singh to the board of Tata Sons, the principal holding company of the Tata group.

Khambata said that in the past, Ratan Tata had asked him twice whether he was agreeable to being nominated as a Trust nominee director, and that he had not accepted. “So I had no personal interest in this. As we had explained, we felt absolutely nothing against Vijay (Singh), and we regretted that he was not present at the meeting so that we could explain our position to him face to face,” he said. Singh’s nomination was blocked at this meeting.

Writing about the media coverage, Khambata said the events of the past few weeks have “distressed” him, particularly “the spin-doctored media narrative”. “I have already regretted the unfair slant media coverage gave this and the consequent pain Vijay has had to bear. With the benefit of hindsight, a greater attempt at forging a consensus should have been made by all,” he said. “All of us, and primarily the Trusts, have been hurt by the engineered media coverage. What has been disappointing to me has been the failure of the Trusts to correct this fundamentally false narrative,” Khambata said.

Stating that he was against the listing of Tata Sons, Khambata said, “On September 11, I was motivated by one factor and one factor alone — to have a more assertive voice on the board of Tata Sons to help espouse the cause of the Trusts against the listing of Tata Sons.” Khambata said that after Ratan’s passing, he and others wanted Noel to lead Tata Trusts; in fact, he was the only person who could have done so. “But we had to work towards that and resist any deferral of that decision,” he said.

“Mehli Mistry proposed and I seconded Noel for Chairman. I have had no cause for regret after that. The Tata legacy is in good hands. Indeed, after September 11, a joint statement of unity by which we all reaffirmed Noel’s leadership was proposed by me twice — the first time almost immediately after September 11 and the second the day before Ratan’s death anniversary,” Khambata said. “Unfortunately, some of you did not respond.”

On November 4, Mehli Mistry, who was involved in a tussle with Tata Trusts Chairman Noel Tata and other trustees, parted ways with the Tata group saying “precipitating matters would cause irreparable harm to the reputation of the Tata Trusts”. A close confidante of Ratan Tata, Mistry was voted out of Tata Trusts by other trustees when his renomination proposal came up. He was appointed a trustee three years ago in October 2022.

“All of you will remember the events of October 9–11, 2024. Those events also belie any suggestion (bizarre as it is) that the events of September 11, 2025 were an attempt to wrest control of the Trusts,” he said.

“I am also puzzled at the current understanding, by some of us, of our resolution of October 17, 2024. I recall the discussions leading to it: Noel was in favour of continuing the system of terms for trustees,” Khambata said. “I had said that I was content with my tenure as trustee; everyone else said this was not about anyone personally, but about the stability of the Trusts — since putting a trustee, for his reappointment, at the mercy of even one other trustee would stifle his independence,” he said.

He said in the past he had agreed with some trustees on one issue but disagreed with them on another. “Each has resulted from my honest assessment of what was in the interests of the Trusts. I recall disagreeing with Mehli on fundamental issues such as giving the SP Group a fair exit (which I thought was essential to the interests of the Trusts) and on individual trustees communicating with Tata Sons (which I believed was impermissible),” Khambata said.

Mehli Mistry later agreed to the resolution that Khambata proposed and that the trustees passed in July 2025, enunciating opposition to listing as not in the Trusts’ interests and at the same time declaring that the Trusts should seek a settlement with the SP Group.

“That I and others should have been subjected to such a vilification campaign in respect of this matter, where we honestly spoke our minds, is completely unwarranted and unfair. I have chosen to remain publicly silent in the larger interests of the Trusts,” he said.

“At times — for example, on the issue of rotational directorship — I have been in a minority of one. This hasn’t deterred me. I believe evincing a different point of view (always congenially) and dissenting where required is part of our fiduciary duty as trustees. Noel has fostered democracy in the Trusts and I welcome that,” he said.

“I had given my word to Ratan that I would try to do the right thing, whether popular or not. I’ve heard a lot recently about the ‘Tata way’. I understand the ‘Tata way’ to mean doing the right thing regardless of whether one is legally bound to do it and regardless of the personal cost or popularity. I’m happy for all my actions to be judged by this standard,” he said.

From the homepage

Upping the ante over SIR, how Mamata is laying TMC groundwork for 2026 Bengal polls

G20 Summit: In Johannesburg, PM Modi proposes four initiatives, including one to counter drug-terror nexus

‘Go to your country’: Foreign DJ claims Goa police officer misbehaved with her, probe initiated