Bengaluru and Mumbai: Tata Trusts has dismissed allegations of impropriety regarding a 37-year-old share transfer, saying the transaction had been vetted by eminent late jurist Nani A. Palkhivala, and was approved by the board of Tata Sons, even as it raised questions about the credibility of the person who is learnt to have complained to the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, after withdrawing a similar suit in the Bombay High Court.
On 8 May, Suresh Tulsiram Patilkhede, a resident of Mumbai and an independent politician, filed a complaint in the high court and sent notices to the Tata Trustees, which the court subsequently allowed him to withdraw five days later, on 13 May.
To be sure, after withdrawing his petition, Patilkhede has filed a new petition alleging irregularities before the charity commissioner, marking a copy to N. Chandrasekharan, chairman of Tata Trusts, and the seven trustees on Friday.
Three weeks after the initial notice was sent, the Tata Trusts in a statement to the media on Friday said it “categorically refutes these baseless allegations and shall be pursuing appropriate legal remedies to safeguard their goodwill and reputation”.
The response comes amid a series of complaints and legal challenges that have put the spotlight on the trusts that collectively control nearly two-thirds of Tata Sons, the holding company of the Tata Group.
Denying any impropriety on the part of Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT), NRTT, or any of the parties to the transaction, the statement said: “It is affirmed that the transaction was lawful, undertaken for consideration, and fully compliant with the rules in force at that point of time. It was cleared at the appropriate levels, including by the late Mr. Nani A. Palkhivala, one of the country's most distinguished lawyers, and approved by the then Board of Tata Sons. The transfer of shares was effected on a valid transfer form duly stamped by the Registrar of Companies.”
The Trusts said that the complaint appeared to be intended to tarnish the reputation of the Tata Trusts and the Tata family, “including the late Mr. Naval H. Tata and his sons, the late Mr. Ratan N. Tata, Mr. Jimmy Tata and Mr. Noel N. Tata”.
“It is pertinent to note that these allegations are being made by persons who have no proven locus standi in the matter. The petitioner, Mr. Suresh Tulsiram Patilkhede, is a serial litigator who has in the past (2020) filed several cases against the Tata Trusts without any locus and with an apparent objective of disrupting the philanthropic activities and functioning of the Tata Trusts,” the statement said.
Over the past few months, Tata Trusts have received at least three legal notices from Patilkhede and a lawyer, as well as complaints to the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner and even a complaint in the Bombay High Court.
First, a Delhi-based lawyer, Katyayani Agrawal, complained to the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner that three among the six trustees—Noel Tata, Pune philanthropist Jehangir HC Jehnagir, and late Ratan Tata’s brother Jimmy Tata—were permanent trustees at Sir Ratan Tata Trust, or SRTT, which owns 23.56% of Tata Sons. Subsequently, Patilkhede made a similar complaint.
Their contention was that SRTT’s decision to have three permanent trustees violated the rules issued by the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner that capped the number of lifetime trustees at one-fourth of the total number of trustees. This implied SRTT, which has six Trustees, could not have more than one permanent Trustee.
Finally, Patilkhede, who fought as an independent candidate against the state’s deputy chief minister, Eknath Shinde, from the Kopri-Pachpakhadi seat in Thane in 2024, challenged the decision of the transfer of shares in 1989 from a Tata trust to the late Naval Tata, later inherited by his sons, Tata Trusts chair Noel Tata, the late Ratan Tata and his brother Jimmy Tata.
The Trusts are in the process of issuing a legal notice to the lawyer, Katyanani, and to Patilkhede, a person aware of the matter said on condition of anonymity.
At least one of these complaints received support from Tata Trusts vice-chairman, Venu Srinivasan, whose complaint in the last week of April about SRTT violating the number of permanent Trustees prompted the regulator to launch a probe and directed the SRTT not to hold any board meetings until its investigation was completed.
This decision of the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner came at a sensitive time for Tata Trusts, which wanted to discuss Srinivasan’s continued tenure as a Tata Trusts nominee on the Tata Sons board.
They have also brought to the fore the differences between Noel Tata and Srinivasan and retired defence secretary Vijay Singh. In the first week of May, Noel Tata opposed the reappointment of TVS chairman emeritus Srinivasan and Singh at a Tata Trusts affiliate, Tata Education and Development Trust (TEDT).
Noel Tata, Srinivasan, Singh, Jimmy Tata, Jehangir, and Mumbai-based lawyer Darius Khambata are the six trustees of SRTT.
Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT) and SRTT control 51.4% of Tata Sons, while six smaller trusts own another 14.36%, taking the total ownership in the apex Tata company to 65.9%.
