Stories
Mehli Mistry Opposes Delays and Questions Eligibility in Tata Trusts Row
- •Mehli Mistry has strongly opposed any further adjournments in the Tata Trusts dispute before the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, citing a deliberate delay of nearly four months in filing replies to his objections.
- •Mistry's lawyers argued that applicants delayed challenging previous orders for months and requested that no further time be granted for filing replies.
- •In a separate submission, Mistry raised questions regarding the eligibility of a proposed substitute reporting trustee.
- •The filings emphasize that any replacement trustee must strictly satisfy the qualifications prescribed under the original trust deed dating back to December 7, 1923, which requires a trustee to be a Parsi practising the Zoroastrian religion.
Key Questions Answered
Former trustee Mehli Mistry opposed further adjournments by applicants who failed to reply to his objections for nearly four months in Change Report No. 676 of 2026. Additionally, in Change Report No. 678 of 2026, he requested scrutiny of the eligibility of a proposed substitute reporting trustee to ensure compliance with the original 1923 trust deed.
According to Clauses 6 and 18 of the trust deed dating back to December 7, 1923, a trustee must be a Parsi practising the Zoroastrian religion. Mehli Mistry argued that any application for substituting a reporting trustee should include an affidavit confirming compliance with these precise requirements.
Mehli Mistry filed his initial objections on June 5, 2026, and despite hearings scheduled on July 7, September 8, and October 15, the applicants failed to file a reply for nearly four months.
