Fairness challenge targets Mittal consortium's Rajasthan Royals takeover
- Kal Somani’s losing consortium publicly challenged the Rajasthan Royals sale process on May 5, after Lakshmi Mittal and Adar Poonawalla agreed to buy control. - The winning deal values Royals at about $1.65 billion, with the Mittal family taking roughly 75%, Poonawalla 18%, and existing investors 7%. - The fight matters because the sale also covers Barbados and Paarl Royals, and now raises governance questions before approvals and closing.
Rajasthan Royals are changing hands, but the real story now is the fight over how that happened. A consortium led by Lakshmi N. Mittal and Adar Poonawalla signed a definitive agreement to buy control of the IPL franchise at a valuation of about $1.65 billion. Then, almost immediately, the group that lost — led by U.S.-based entrepreneur Kal Somani — went public and said the process was not fair. That turns a big sports deal into something messier: a test of how billion-dollar cricket franchises get sold. ### What changed this week? The change is concrete. On May 3, the Mittal-Poonawalla group agreed to acquire Rajasthan Royals, with the Mittal family set to own about 75% after completion, Poonawalla about 18%, and approved existing investors — including Manoj Badale — holding the remaining 7%. The deal is expected to close in the third quarter of 2026, subject to approval from the BCCI and India’s Competition Commission. ### Why is there a dispute at all? Because this was not supposed to end this way. A Somani-led consortium had emerged as the winning bidder in March at roughly $1.63 billion, after multiple rounds of bidding. That group included big-name U.S. sports investors, among them Rob Walton and Michael Hamp. But the earlier deal did not close, and the asset ended up with a different buyer at a slightly higher valuation. ### What is Somani’s group actually alleging? Basically, the group says it never walked away and was ready to finish the transaction. Its public line is that it stayed fully committed, fully funded, and engaged through the final stages, so the eventual outcome does not look like a fair or consistent evaluation of bids. The language is careful, but the implication is blunt — they think the process changed around them. ### Is this a lawsuit yet? Not from what is public so far. Right now it is a reputational and governance challenge, not a fully formed court fight. But these statements are often the first step before a legal push, because they establish a record: we were in, we were ready, and we dispute the explanation from the public posture of both sides, not a disclosed legal filing. ### Why is Rajasthan Royals worth this much? Because this is not just one IPL team anymore. The transaction includes the wider Royals portfolio — Rajasthan Royals in the IPL, Paarl Royals in South Africa’s SA20, and Barbados Royals in the CPL. So the buyer is getting a multi-league cricket brand, not just a single franchise with a two-month season. That helps explain why the valuation reached about $1.65 billion. ### Why do the Mittals and Poonawalla matter here? They bring two things sellers love — money and long-term credibility. Lakshmi Mittal’s family controls ArcelorMittal, and Adar Poonawalla is one of India’s best-known business figures through Serum Institute and Poonawalla Fincorp. The planned board after closing would include Lakshmi Mittal, Aditya Mittal, Vanisha Mittal-Bhatia, Poonawalla, and Badale. That signals continuity, not a tear-it-down takeover. ### So what is the real issue underneath? It is process trust. In private-company deals, especially trophy sports assets, the seller usually has wide discretion. But if one bidder believes it was led through months of negotiations only to be displaced without a clear, consistent standard, that leaves a scar. The catch is that even if the sale still closes, future bidders notice. They price that uncertainty in. ### Bottom line? The Mittal consortium still looks set to take control of Rajasthan Royals. But the sale is no longer just a headline about a record valuation. It is now also a live argument about transparency, bidder treatment, and who gets to define “fair” when one of cricket’s most valuable franchises is sold.
