The NCLAT Chennai is set to deliver its verdict on Byju Raveendran’s appeal against insolvency proceedings on August 2. The ruling will significantly affect the Rs.158 crore settlement that Raveendran and the BCCI claim to have reached.
Chennai: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Chennai expected to deliver its verdict on Friday, August 2, regarding Byju Raveendran‘s appeal against the initiation of insolvency proceedings against his edtech firm, Byju’s.
The appeal challenges an earlier order from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in Bengaluru, which initiated the proceedings against Think and Learn, the parent company of Byju’s.
Read Also: Foreign Creditor’s Seeks NCLT Regarding Byju’s Share Transfer
A bench comprising judicial member Rakesh Kumar Jain and technical member Jatindranath Swain also instructed that the Company of Creditors (CoC) should not be formed until the verdict is announced on Friday.
The NCLAT’s decision will directly affect the Rs.158 crore settlement that Raveendran and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) claim to have reached regarding unpaid dues related to the sponsorship of the Indian cricket team’s jerseys.
Senior Advocates Punit Bali and Arun Kathpalia, representing Raveendran, informed the NCLAT on Thursday that Raveendran’s brother Riju, the largest shareholder of Byju’s, submitted an undertaking detailing the source of funds used to repay BCCI. They asserted that Riju using his personal funds, having sold his shares and paid income tax on the proceeds, negating any allegations of round-tripping by the company’s financial creditors.
Bali stated,
“This is all tax-paid money. It is my money, my personal shares, and money that I have infused back into the company. This money is also not part of the 533 million. So, at this stage, any third-party intervention is not warranted,”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing BCCI, argued that the Board was entitled to the money and since it had been shown that the funds being paid by Riju generated in India, there should be no opposition to the settlement.
However, Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Arvindh Pandian, and Krishnendu Datta, representing one of the financial creditors of Think and Learn, continued to oppose the settlement. They insisted that the NCLAT should allow the formation of the CoC and that the Resolution Professional appointed by the NCLT Bengaluru should proceed as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The Appellate Tribunal directed all parties to conclude their arguments by tomorrow to enable the court to “dictate the order in the court itself.”
Read Also: Investor Group Approaches NCLT Bengaluru Against Byju’s Alleging Mismanagement
Representing Byju Raveendran were Senior Advocates Kathpalia, Bali, and Dhyan Chinnappa, along with Advocates Rishabh Gupta, Zulfiqar Memon, Waseem Pangarkar, and Nadiya Sarguroh of MZM Legal LLP.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for BCCI.
Senior Advocates Rohatgi, Pandian, Datta, and Advocates Prateek Kumar, Nikhilesh Rao, Thriyambak Kannan, Raveena Rai, Avinash Balakrishna, Tejas Shetty, and Abhishek P represented the impleading applicant GLAS Trust Company LLC.