On September 17, 2026, Tata Sons’ five‑member board met in Mumbai to decide on the Group Chairman’s reappointment. The directors—Noel Tata, Venu Srinivasan, and three others—voted 4‑1 in favour of N Chandrasekaran, with the chairman’s casting vote tipping the balance in his favour.
Article 121 of the Articles of Association mandates that a board majority must also secure the assent of a majority of the Tata Trusts nominees. The two nominees are Noel Tata and Venu Srinivasan, and only Srinivasan voted in support, leaving the Trusts’ requirement technically unmet.
To address the dispute, Tata Sons produced legal opinions from former Chief Justice UU Lalit and former Supreme Court Judge BN Srikrishna. Both agreed that the casting vote, exercised under Article 104B, satisfied Article 121 and that the resolution was valid.
Tata Trusts, however, argue that a majority of two is needed, citing Noel Tata’s dissent. They contend the chairman’s casting vote cannot replace the Trusts’ nominee majority, and the resolution should be void.
The Trusts have indicated they will seek a judicial review, possibly before the Supreme Court, while the reappointment remains in force pending the outcome of any legal challenge.