Divergent Stewardship in India: A Regulatory Blind Spot

India’s SEBI Stewardship Code mandates institutional investors, such as Asset Management Companies and Alternative Investment Funds, to actively monitor and engage with investee companies to promote long-term value creation and corporate governance. However, the Code’s silence on threshold limits for triggering stewardship responsibilities has created significant regulatory ambiguity. This article presents original empirical findings from an analysis of stewardship policies of 27 major AMCs in India as of September 2025, revealing a wide divergence in threshold-based engagement practices. AMCs have adopted quantitative, qualitative, and hybrid approaches, with thresholds ranging from 2 to 5 percent of AUM or paid- up capital, effectively limiting active oversight of several investee companies. This divergence constitutes regulatory arbitrage, weakening minority shareholder protection and diluting the Code’s intent. The article recommends that SEBI standardize stewardship thresholds, mandate transparent disclosure, and issue clear regulatory directives to ensure uniform and meaningful institutional engagement across the industry.

Siddharth Singh, Hemant Tewari

March 30, 2026

Financing Corporate Acquisitions: RBI’s Framework and the Case for Linked Reforms

Anasruta Roy

March 30, 2026

Quantitative Thresholds, Qualitative Gaps: SEBI’s HVDLE Framework in Perspective

Vaishnawi Sinha, Ameya Sharma

February 23, 2026

Bouncing the Boundaries: Should Section 138 NI Act Complainants be Treated as “Victims” under Section 372 CrPC? – Part 2

Anmol Aggarwal, Ria Bansal

February 16, 2026

Bouncing the Boundaries: Should Section 138 NI Act Complainants be Treated as “Victims” under Section 372 CrPC? – Part 1

Anmol Aggarwal, Ria Bansal

February 16, 2026

Beyond Compensation and a New Dawn for Section 74: Supreme Court and Agreed Sum for Breach of Contract

Chiranth Mukunda

February 7, 2026

Between Innovation and Safeguards: Analysing SEBI’s 2025 Algorithmic Trading Circular (Part II)

Manav Pamnani

February 1, 2026

Between Innovation and Safeguards: Analysing SEBI’s 2025 Algorithmic Trading Circular (Part I)

Manav Pamnani

February 1, 2026

Ad-Interim Orders, Section 37(1)(b), and Article 227: Analysing the Missed Opportunity in Jindal Steel v. Bansal Infra

Sharnam Agarwal

January 3, 2026

No Claim Certificates in Indian Construction Arbitration: Balancing Coercion and Discharge

Prof. (Dr.) Ajar Rab

December 20, 2025

What’s in a Name? On the Regulation of “Phantom Stocks” under Tax law and FEMA

Bhasvar Adlakha

December 15, 2025

Slicing the Award Too Thin: HPCL v. G.R. Engineering and the Drift from Severance to Modification under Section 34

Anubhuti Raje

December 1, 2025

Corporate Governance and Minority Protection: Dissecting SEBI’s New LODR Framework for HVDLEs

Pragya Richa Tiwary

November 4, 2025

Balancing Flexibility and Investor Protection: A Critical Review of SEBI’s Proposed Reforms for Asset Management Companies

Arihant Sethia, Keshav Kulshrestha

November 1, 2025

Algorithmic Insurance and Resource Pooling: The Missing Piece in SEBI’s AI/ML Governance Framework

Ashish Rawat, Saksham Shivam

October 30, 2025

A “High-Stakes Bet”? Revisiting SEBI’s ESG Debt Securities Framework

Abhishek Kajal

October 25, 2025

6th NLS Trilegal International Arbitration Conference (NLSTIAC) 2025

NLSTIAC Rapporteurs

October 16, 2025

Managerial Remuneration should be classified as a Related Party Transaction to curb Promoter Influence

Mohit Kumar Manderna, Kritika Vatsa

October 11, 2025

Balancing Shareholder And Creditor Interests In Corporate Insolvency: A Global Perspective

Pranava Kapur, Garrv Jain

October 4, 2025

Modification, Merits, and Mayhem: Can Indian Arbitration Regain Coherence? (Part II)

Animesh Bordoloi, Dhruv Madan, Sanjana Pershad

September 12, 2025

Modification, Merits, and Mayhem: Can Indian Arbitration Regain Coherence? (Part I)

Animesh Bordoloi, Dhruv Madan, Sanjana Pershad

September 12, 2025