TVS family feud: Mallika Srinivasan, Lakshmi Venu allege assets not divided on the basis of economic interests

The fight is finally out in the open.

Days after reports emerged of a feud within the Venu Srinivasan family over ownership and division of wealth, Mallika Srinivasan, the wife of group patriarch Venu Srinivasan, and Lakshmi Venu, his daughter, say that a fair recognition of rightful economic ownership remains unresolved.

“We have consistently sought an amicable resolution through family dialogue and have refrained from discussing private family matters publicly,” Mallika and Lakshmi said in a statement. “However, given the narrative now being presented, we believe it is necessary to clarify certain fundamental facts.”

In their statement, the duo states that no economic settlement has been reached within the Venu Srinivasan family. “The larger TVS family partition, agreed in 2020 and implemented subsequently, was undertaken through a process involving the relevant stakeholders,” the duo says. “No comparable process involving transparent valuation, discussion and mutual consent has taken place concerning the economic interests within the Venu Srinivasan family. No agreement dividing these economic interests has been concluded.”

In 2020, the four branches of the TVS Group agreed to split holding structures to eliminate cross-holdings and align corporate ownership directly with the family branches that manage them. The family reached this through a December 10, 2020, agreement following a valuation and settlement process. “The suggestion that all family assets belong exclusively to one individual, who is therefore free to distribute them unilaterally, is neither an agreed nor an established position,” Mallika and Lakshmi say.

At the centre of the feud were concerns that the businesses entrusted to the children as part of the succession plan would form the basis of the wealth division. If so, Sudarshan Venu, who looks after TVS Motor, will inherit a significantly larger share, as the automaker has a staggering market value of ₹1.86 lakh crore.

“Management responsibilities must not be confused with economic ownership,” the duo says. “The allocation of leadership roles or opportunities to manage businesses does not constitute a division of family assets, nor can it substitute for the rightful economic interests of family members. Similarly, arrangements concerning trademarks, brand usage and non-compete obligations cannot be represented as an economic settlement when no such settlement formed part of those arrangements.”

A 2024 family agreement barred Sudarshan Venu from using the names “TVS”, “Sundaram” or “Sundram” in the die-casting business, over which Venu Srinivasan and Lakshmi Venu have exclusive rights.

Mallika and Lakshmi may not use those names for the TVS Holdings businesses. The rights cannot be changed, and the agreement lasts forever. It also ensures that Srinivasan and Sudarshan cannot enter the tractor business, die-casting, or own shares or voting rights in companies in either business. Mallika and Lakshmi have the same restrictions in the auto business.

Currently, Sudarshan Venu oversees TVS Motor, while Lakshmi Venu is Managing Director of TVS Holdings Limited (formerly Sundaram-Clayton Limited), a position she has held since 2022 after previously serving as its Joint Managing Director. Lakshmi is also Vice Chairman at TAFE, where her mother is the chairman. TAFE is India’s second-largest tractor maker, founded in 1960 by her maternal grandfather as a joint venture between Massey Ferguson (part of the AGCO Group) and the Chennai-based Amalgamations Group.

The 80-year-old Amalgamations Group is one of India’s largest light engineering groups, comprising 40 companies that make everything from diesel engines to automobile components, and even owns Higginbothams Pvt. Ltd. TAFE says the duo has no bearing on the economic settlement within the Venu Srinivasan family and should not be conflated with it.

The family feud comes at a time when Venu Srinivasan finds himself at the centre a of the ongoing Tata Sons crisis, challenging Noel Tata, chairman of the Tata Trusts. "Arrangements made unilaterally cannot be regarded as fair or consensual,” the duo says. “Any equitable settlement must recognize the legitimate economic interests of all concerned parties and be based on a transparent process of valuation, discussion and agreement.”

For now, the mother-daughter duo, who led the fight last year at TAFE against the global farm giant Massey Ferguson over brand rights and eventually won, says they are still seeking a fair, amicable resolution within the family. “The fundamental issue is not about management positions, which have been compensated appropriately and commensurately,” the duo says. “It is about the fair recognition of rightful economic ownership, which remains unresolved.”

The fight is certainly out in the open. Over to Venu Srinivasan now.