“Painful to Watch”: Tata Group Veteran Noshir Soonawala Breaks Sil
News THE ECONOMIC TIMES, livelaw.in, LAW, LAWYERS NEAR ME, LAWYERS NEAR BY ME, LIVE LAW, THE TIMES OF INDIA, HINDUSTAN TIMES, the indian express, LIVE LAW .IN
The former Tata executive warns that internal discord within Tata Trusts threatens the values and governance legacy of India’s most respected business conglomerate
Mumbai — Monday, October 27, 2025
In a rare and strongly worded intervention, Tata Group veteran Noshir Soonawala has urged the trustees of Tata Trusts to resolve their internal differences, describing the ongoing conflict within the conglomerate’s top philanthropic body as “painful” to witness.
The long-serving former executive, who spent decades shaping the financial and governance foundations of the Tata Group under the guidance of Ratan Tata, said the current rift among trustees risks eroding the values and reputation that have defined the 156-year-old industrial house.
“It is painful to see what is happening within the Tatas — a group where I have spent almost my entire career. I sincerely hope that the trustees come together to resolve their differences for the greater good,” Soonawala said, speaking to.
Veteran’s Voice Amid an Unfolding Governance Crisis
Soonawala’s statement marks the first public acknowledgment from a high-ranking Tata veteran regarding the internal feud among trustees. His words echo mounting unease within the Tata ecosystem, as the Trusts — which control around 66% of Tata Sons, the holding company of the group — face accusations of discord and factionalism.
The dispute reportedly centers around the reappointment of Venu Srinivasan as a “trustee for life” and disagreements over governance norms, succession planning, and the process of nominating directors to Tata Sons’ board.
Insiders suggest that two camps — one aligned with Noel Tata, half-brother of Ratan Tata, and another with veteran trustee Mehli Mistry — have clashed over the structure and duration of trusteeships. These internal disagreements, say observers, could have far-reaching implications for Tata Sons’ board stability and strategic direction.
A Pillar of Tata Values Speaks Out
Noshir Soonawala’s voice carries immense weight. Having joined the Tata Group in 1968, he served for over four decades in key financial roles and was instrumental in shaping the governance framework that underpins Tata entities today.
Known for his integrity and alignment with Ratan Tata’s leadership philosophy, Soonawala was a key figure in Tata’s major financial restructuring phases, including the landmark 1995 rights issue that consolidated Tata Sons’ shareholding among group companies.
That a figure of his stature has chosen to publicly address the turmoil underscores the seriousness of the matter. “Soonawala is not a man of publicity. If he’s speaking out, it means the concern has crossed a threshold,” said a senior Tata insider, requesting anonymity.
Understanding the Tata Trusts’ Rift
The Tata Trusts, comprising several charitable trusts — most prominently the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and the Sir Ratan Tata Trust — collectively control a majority stake in Tata Sons, making them the most powerful shareholders in the conglomerate.
These trusts play a unique dual role: they fund philanthropic initiatives across health, education, and rural development while also exercising decisive influence over Tata Sons’ leadership and board composition.
In recent months, tensions have reportedly escalated over how these trusts manage their responsibilities. Disagreements have emerged on questions such as:
- Should trustees hold lifetime positions or face fixed tenure limits?
- How should successors be appointed to preserve both continuity and accountability?
- To what extent should trustees intervene in the operational affairs of Tata Sons and its listed companies?
The internal contest over these questions, sources suggest, has stalled several key policy decisions, including new philanthropic allocations and director nominations.
Governance, Legacy, and Investor Perception
The Tata Group, often hailed as the gold standard for corporate governance in India, is now facing questions that strike at its own foundations. Analysts warn that prolonged trustee discord could erode investor confidence, particularly in listed Tata entities such as Tata Motors, Tata Steel, and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS).
“The Tata Group’s credibility is built not just on financial success but on the moral authority of its governance. Any sign of division within the Trusts will inevitably spill over into perceptions of Tata Sons and, by extension, its operating companies,” said a Mumbai-based corporate governance expert.
In the age of transparency and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) scrutiny, the optics of internal conflict among trustees can have reputational and regulatory consequences.
A Call for Restoration and Unity
Soonawala’s message is not just a lament but a warning. He urged trustees to return to the group’s founding principles of trust, humility, and service, cautioning that the Tata legacy must not be compromised by personal or procedural disputes.
“Disagreements are natural,” he noted, “but when they become prolonged, they harm the very fabric that binds an institution. The Tata Trusts were built on unity of purpose — that must never be lost.”
His comments come amid growing calls from former executives, governance scholars, and stakeholders for the Trusts to strengthen their internal frameworks through transparency and time-bound decision-making.
Why the Stakes Are Higher Than Ever
The Tata Group today spans over 100 countries, employs more than 900,000 people, and operates in sectors ranging from IT and automobiles to power and hospitality. Its stability depends not just on market forces but on the smooth functioning of its ownership structure.
The rift within Tata Trusts is not merely an administrative issue — it strikes at the heart of the group’s continuity. The Trusts’ ability to act cohesively affects how directors are appointed, how dividends are distributed, and how group strategy aligns with long-term societal goals.
In 2016, Tata Sons underwent another governance shock when Cyrus Mistry was abruptly removed as chairman — an episode that led to a years-long legal battle ending in the Supreme Court. That conflict, too, originated in disagreements between Tata Trusts and the operating company’s leadership.
Soonawala’s statement, therefore, resonates as both a moral and practical appeal to prevent history from repeating itself.
Industry Reaction and Broader Context
Business leaders and analysts across India have interpreted Soonawala’s remarks as a wake-up call.
“Few people command the moral respect that Noshir Soonawala does in Tata circles,” said an executive at a Tata affiliate company. “His statement reflects what many insiders feel but haven’t voiced — that the Trusts need to restore unity before it affects the larger group.”
Others argue that the episode reflects the growing pains of large legacy conglomerates transitioning to modern governance models. “The Tata Trusts are navigating a 21st-century corporate landscape with a 19th-century philanthropic charter,” noted a corporate historian. “That tension needs resolution through structural reform, not internal rivalry.”
Source:
