No economic settlement reached in TVS family asset split: Mallika Srinivasan, Lakshmi Venu

A day after TVS Motor Chairman Emeritus Venu Srinivasan told Republic Business that the division of business interests between his children was a carefully considered and fair succession arrangement, his wife Mallika Srinivasan and daughter Lakshmi Venu on Monday asserted that no economic settlement had been reached within the family and that their rightful ownership interests remained unresolved.

In a joint public statement that brought into sharp focus the differences within one of India's most prominent business families, Mallika and Lakshmi countered Srinivasan's contention that the businesses and assets were his to allocate and that the separation had been undertaken transparently, after consultations with family members.

"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," the two said.

In a statement to Republic Business on Sunday, Srinivasan had maintained that he had the authority to allocate his assets and business interests in what he considered the best interests of the family and its businesses. He described the separation of responsibilities between Lakshmi Venu and Sudarshan Venu as a deliberate succession decision rather than a family dispute.

His stated philosophy was to give the next generation ownership and control of businesses while they were still young enough to build and expand them. Under this arrangement, Lakshmi was entrusted with growing Sundaram-Clayton (SCL), while Sudarshan was given responsibility for the motors business.

Srinivasan maintained that the allocation was fair and had taken into account several factors, including the respective business interests and the anticipated succession at TAFE, the tractor manufacturer headed by Mallika Srinivasan. According to him, Mallika's intention to eventually pass ownership and control of TAFE to Lakshmi had also been factored into the succession arrangement.

He further maintained that the separation had been carried out openly, after careful consultation with family members, and that their views had been considered before the arrangements were accepted and implemented.

However, Mallika and Lakshmi said "management responsibilities must not be confused with economic ownership." Their statement added allocating leadership roles or opportunities to manage businesses did not constitute a division of family assets or substitute for the rightful economic interests of family members.

The two asserted that no process involving transparent valuation, discussions and mutual consent, comparable to the partition of the larger TVS family in 2020, had taken place to settle economic interests within the Venu Srinivasan family.

In 2020, the larger TVS family, comprising multiple branches, valued and divided its assets on a mutually agreeable basis, with compensation for family members. The partition was subsequently implemented through a process involving the relevant stakeholders. In 2024, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) was executed among Venu Srinivasan, Mallika Srinivasan, Lakshmi Venu and Sudarshan Venu.

Under the MoU, Srinivasan and Sudarshan control the automobile businesses, including flagship TVS Motor, financial services company TVS Credit, and the real estate and drone businesses under TVS Holdings. Srinivasan and Lakshmi control Sundaram-Clayton, while Mallika and Lakshmi manage TAFE, which is not part of the TVS Group.

Srinivasan and Sudarshan have reportedly maintained that the 2024 MoU constitutes a family settlement. Mallika and Lakshmi, however, contend that it primarily addresses trademark rights, brand usage and non-compete arrangements rather than the economic division of family assets.

"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," the statement said.

The dispute reportedly came to the fore after Lakshmi became aware of a statutory filing made by TVS Holdings in April 2025 declaring significant beneficial ownership in favour of Sudarshan Venu.

The role of TAFE has emerged as another significant point of disagreement between the two sides.

While Srinivasan cited the anticipated succession at TAFE as one of the considerations behind his allocation of business interests, Mallika and Lakshmi maintained that the company could not be brought into the equation while determining economic ownership within the Venu Srinivasan family.

Mallika clarified that TAFE belongs to the Amalgamations Group, a separate family business group in which she is a shareholder, and has no bearing on the economic settlement within her husband's family.

"TAFE has no bearing on the economic settlement within the Venu Srinivasan family and should not be conflated with it. Presenting her longstanding association and custodial role with TAFE as evidence of an equitable distribution of economic interests within the Venu Srinivasan family is fundamentally misleading," the statement said.

Mallika and Lakshmi said arrangements made unilaterally could not be regarded as fair or consensual. "Any equitable settlement must recognise the legitimate economic interests of all concerned parties and be based on a transparent process of valuation, discussion and agreement," the statement said.

They emphasised that the fundamental issue was not management positions, for which compensation had been appropriate and commensurate, but recognition of their economic ownership rights.

Despite the sharp differences in their respective positions, Mallika and Lakshmi expressed hope for an early and amicable resolution, saying it would be in the best interests of the family, its businesses and all stakeholders. "We remain committed to resolving these matters through constructive dialogue, with dignity, grace and equity," they said.