THE LONG SHADOW OF OLD BATTLES IN TATA-MISTRY CLASH

The rift between Noel Tata and Mehli Mistry reflects old ones between philanthropy and profits, and between public and private interests.The faultlines run through the group's history

- - ALAM SRINIVAS

DEEP tensions within the immediate and extended family, emotions within the Parsi community, and wars between Parsis and non-Parsis have been part and parcel of the Tata Group's tumultuous history over the past 150 years. Tata Trusts, the more philanthropic end of the sprawling salt-steel-software empire, owns a majority stake in Tata Sons, the holding firm. So the former's footprints within the world of profits and boardrooms have always constituted an uneasy ingress, dogging the family for a century. British colonial rulers and post-independence regimes, all have meddled in the Tatas' affairs.

Hence, there is nothing shocking about the stink that erupted within the Tata Trusts, originating from the feud between Mehli Mistry, a trustee, and Noel Tata, the new heir and the late Ratan Tata's half-brother. Noel ejected Mehli from the trust, but that set in motion a disruptive cascade that ended up crashing into the Tata Sons' boardroom.

At stake is a tangled web of aggravated relations: among Parsis (Mehli vs Noel), between Parsis and non-Parsis, and within kinfolk (Noel vs the family of the late Cyrus Mistry, his brother-in-law).

The group has grappled with such shenanigans in the past, too.

Mehli, who is likely to legally contest his ouster, sees himself as the holder of Ratan's legacy. He wants a say in all nodal centres across the group. He is peeved that Noel trusts non-Parsis: two are in Tata Trusts, a third is Tata Sons' chairman. Mehli is Cyrus's cousin, but supported Ratan during the Ratan-Cyrus spat. It is possible that Mehli dislikes Noel's recent moves to fix the love-hate relationship with his in-laws.

Implicit in these are three issues.