The corporate consulting firm InGovern asserts that subsequent changes in business valuation should not, by themselves, serve as a reason to reopen a previously formalized family agreement, considering the ongoing succession dispute within the TVS group family.
In its November 2026 report, titled 'When Family Succession Disputes Become a Risk to Public Company Governance — Lessons from the TVS Succession Case,' InGovern emphasized that disagreements concerning family arrangements must be resolved through legally documented agreements and appropriate legal procedures, without disrupting the governance or operational activities of public companies.
The report notes that 'subsequent changes in business operations and valuations should not, in themselves, be grounds for altering a formalized family arrangement'; any change or reinterpretation must be verified against the terms of the agreement and applicable legislation.
These remarks surfaced amid disagreements between Venu Srinivasan, his wife Mallika Srinivasan, and daughter Lakshmi Venugopal regarding the division of family assets and businesses.
Venu Srinivasan insists that the disputed assets are his personal property and that the distribution of these assets among his children, Lakshmi and Sudarshan Venugopal, was fair and equal as of December 10, 2020, when a broader agreement on the TVS group was reached.
However, Mallika Srinivasan and Lakshmi Venugopal publicly state that no economic settlement was reached within the family, and they also claim that no transparent valuation or mutual consent for such a settlement took place.
InGovern noted that the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by all four family members on March 21, 2024, and disclosed to the stock exchanges by TVS Holdings the following day. Nevertheless, this disclosure did not contain detailed terms of the agreement nor establish whether a complete economic settlement had been finalized.
The consulting firm clarified that it does not act as an arbiter for competing claims by family members. It also acknowledged that it did not study the MoU, trust documents, or confidential valuation documents.