14/08/2026
๐๐ฒ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐๐ต๐ผ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ถ๐๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐, ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ ๐ต๐ผ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฏ๐๐๐ถ๐ป๐ฒ๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐ ๐ฏ๐ฒ ๐ด๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฑ.
Many founders believe that dividing shares equally among their children is the fairest solution.
But ownership, control and responsibility are different decisions.
One child may carry the responsibility of running the business.
Another may remain outside the enterprise.
A married daughter may still have a legitimate economic interest.
An NRI successor may create regulatory, tax and cross-border considerations.
The family therefore needs to decide:
Who should manage the business?
Who should hold voting control?
How should the child carrying operational responsibility be recognised?
How should inactive children benefit without obstructing management?
What should happen if shares pass through death, incapacity, divorce, pledge or transfer?
Without clear provisions, control can move unintentionally to spouses, outsiders or another branch of the family.
Family consensus is important, but it must be implemented through properly aligned arrangements.
The Will, trust deed, company documents, shareholder agreements, nominations and family-governance framework should all support the same intended outcome.
Personal guarantees, pledged assets and business liabilities should also be reviewed before assuming that family wealth is protected.
A trust or Will cannot correct an unclear governance model.
The real task is not merely to decide who receives what.
It is to ensure that ownership, authority and responsibility continue to work together after the founder is no longer making every important decision.