Mallika Srinivasan and Lakshmi Venu have issued a joint statement asserting that the economic settlement within the Venu Srinivasan (VS) family remains pending. The clarification comes in response to recent media reports suggesting that a division of assets has already been concluded. In their statement, the duo explicitly disputed these claims, noting that no agreement regarding the division of economic interests has been finalised.
To provide context, the statement distinguished their situation from the broader TVS family partition, which was agreed upon in 2020 and subsequently implemented through a process of valuation, discussions, and mutual consent. Lakshmi Venu and Mallika Srinivasan emphasised that no comparable, formal process has taken place within their specific family branch.
In a separate statement attributed to Venu Srinivasan, he suggested that he had exercised his liberty to deal with the businesses and assets in a manner he deemed appropriate for the interests of the family and the enterprises. He stated his belief that the next generation should be granted ownership and control while they remain young, citing this as his motivation for the separation between Lakshmi and Sudarshan. According to his comments, the separation was intended to clarify ownership and control, with Lakshmi taking forward the SCL business and Sudarshan leading the motor business.
Venu Srinivasan further noted that the separation was carried out on a fair basis, noting that Mallika Srinivasan, who currently controls TAFE, had expressed her intention to pass ownership and control of TAFE to Lakshmi, who serves as the company's vice-chairman. He maintained that these actions were taken with transparency and consultation.
However, in their rebuttal, Lakshmi Venu and Mallika Srinivasan contested the notion that the assets belonged exclusively to one individual who possessed the authority to decide on their distribution unilaterally. They further clarified the position of TAFE, stating that the company belongs to the Amalgamations Group—a separate family business entity in which Mallika Srinivasan is a shareholder—and asserted that it has no direct bearing on the economic settlement within the VS family.
The joint statement also clarified the nature of the ongoing dispute, stating that management roles and arrangements regarding trademarks, brand usage, and non-compete obligations should not be viewed as substitutes for a formal economic settlement. The duo stated that while management positions have been appropriately compensated, the core issue remains the recognition of rightful economic ownership, which they insist remains unresolved.
As of now, the disagreement highlights a divergence in perspectives regarding the finality of asset distribution. The statement serves as a formal assertion that despite previous actions taken to manage the businesses and delegate operational control to the next generation, a comprehensive settlement regarding the economic interests of the family members has yet to be reached.
Comments