The Supreme Court of India issued notice and ordered status quo in the dispute arising from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ruling on the Committee of Creditors of Think and Learn Private Limited (Byju’s).
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court issued notice and directed that status quo be maintained in the dispute stemming from the NCLAT’s decision on the legal status of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) of Think and Learn Private Limited (Byju’s).
A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan stated,
“We have to hear this matter. Issue notice. Let status quo be maintained.”
This follows the CoC’s challenge to the February 24, 2026 judgment of the Chennai Bench of the NCLAT, which found that although a CoC is not a juristic person in the conventional sense, it may sue and be sued in its own name under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
The dispute arises from the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Think and Learn, initiated under Section 9 of the IBC.
In August 2024 the resolution professional formed a four-member CoC. Within ten days, the RP reconstituted the CoC, removing GLAS Trust Company which held a 99.41 percent voting share and Aditya Birla Capital Limited.
Both removed creditors challenged their exclusion before the NCLT and won in January 2025, leading to their reinstatement on the CoC. Thereafter, a suspended director of the corporate debtor filed a petition seeking GLAS Trust’s removal from the CoC.
While these matters were pending, the CoC sought to implead itself, contending that the litigation affected its composition and functioning. The NCLT refused the impleadment, holding that the CoC lacked independent legal personality and that the dispute related solely to the creditor whose membership was contested.
On appeal, the NCLAT issued a notable ruling on the CoC’s legal character.
The Appellate Tribunal observed that the CoC is a statutory creation and not a juristic person in the strict sense. Nevertheless, taking a practical view, it allowed the CoC to litigate in its own name for disputes arising under the IBC. Simultaneously, the NCLAT upheld the NCLT’s decision declining impleadment in the specific proceedings concerning GLAS Trust’s membership.
The CoC has now moved the Supreme Court against that NCLAT order.
The status quo direction preserves the current position on the CoC and the related proceedings until the Supreme Court hears the matter fully.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal appeared for the CoC; Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta represented the resolution professional; and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal represented GLAS Trust.
Factual Background of the Case:
The insolvency proceedings against Byju’s were initiated after the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), alleging default of Rs 158.90 crore in sponsorship dues linked to the Indian National Cricket Team jerseys. On 16 July 2024, the NCLT’s Bengaluru Bench admitted Think & Learn Private Limited into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), and suspended the existing board of directors.
Subsequently, the founders attempted to settle the BCCI dues and terminate the insolvency. Co-founder Riju Raveendran deposited Rs 158 crore, stating that the payment was made from personal funds. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai, initially accepted the settlement and stayed the CIRP on 2 August 2024. However, US-based lender GLAS Trust objected, contending that the funds were improperly sourced from a 1.2 billion Dollar loan facility.
The Supreme Court of India later set aside the NCLAT’s decision, holding that once insolvency is admitted, any withdrawal must comply with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and receive approval from the Committee of Creditors (CoC), rather than being resolved privately.
The dispute has since shifted to questions surrounding control of the insolvency process. GLAS Trust presently commands a 99.41% voting share in the CoC based on its substantial financial claim. The IRP had earlier attempted to exclude GLAS Trust and Aditya Birla Finance from the CoC, but in January 2025, the NCLT ordered their reinstatement.
Observations of the NCLAT:
In further developments, the NCLAT Chennai dismissed appeals filed by the BCCI and Riju Raveendran, reiterating that any settlement including the Rs 158 crore payment must secure approval from 90% of the CoC. The Supreme Court affirmed this position in November 2025.
The appellate tribunal also upheld the NCLT’s direction restoring GLAS Trust and Aditya Birla Finance to the CoC, clarifying that the IRP lacks authority to unilaterally alter creditor classification once the committee has been constituted.
Additionally, the NCLAT declined to stay a rights issue undertaken by Byju’s subsidiary, Aakash Educational Services, observing that insolvency proceedings against the parent company should not impede the functioning of a financially viable subsidiary.
Case Title: Committee of Creditors, Think and Learn v. Riju Raveendran
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE