Byju's Insolvency : Supreme Court Issues Notice On Riju Ravindran's Plea Against NCLAT Mandating CoC Nod For CIRP Withdrawal

The Supreme Court recently issued notice on an appeal challenging the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment holding that the application for withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Think and Learn Pvt Ltd (trade name Byju's) needed approval from 90 percent of the Committee of Creditors. A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjay Kumar stated that the prayer for interim relief would be considered on the next date of hearing, 21 July 2025. The appeal has been filed by filed by Riju Ravindran, suspended director and promoter of Think and Learn Pvt Ltd. BCCI has also challenged the NCLAT judgment.The appellants sought status quo of CIRP proceedings.“Issue notice. Mr. Prateek Kumar, learned counsel accepts and waives formal notice on behalf of respondent no. Issue notice to other respondents, returnable on 21st July, 2025. The prayer for interim relief to be considered on the next date fixed i.e. 21st July, 2025”, the Court noted.The counsel for GLAS Trust Company LLC accepted and waived formal notice on behalf of his client. Notice has been issued to the remaining respondents – Pankaj Srivastava, Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Aditya Birla Finance Limited, and is returnable on 21 July 2025.The appeal has been filed against the NCLAT's 17 April 2025 judgment, which had dismissed appeals filed by Riju Ravindran and BCCI. The appeals were against the NCLT Bengaluru's direction that an application to withdraw the insolvency process against the company must be placed before the Committee of Creditors (CoC) under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and Regulation 30A(1)(b) of the IBBI Regulations.Ravindran and BCCI challenged this, arguing that the withdrawal application was submitted before the CoC was formed and therefore did not require CoC approval. However, the NCLAT held that Form FA (the prescribed form for filing withdrawal application), was filed on 14 November 2024, after the CoC was constituted on 21 August 2024, and that CoC approval was mandatory.Byju's faced insolvency proceedings after defaulting on payments to BCCI for a jersey sponsorship deal. The CIRP started on 16 July 2024 on BCCI's Section 9 petition. On the same day, the NCLT dismissed a Section 7 petition filed by GLAS Trust Company LLC for recovery of USD 984 million, allowing it to submit claims before the IRP. After a settlement between Byju's and BCCI, the NCLAT set aside the CIRP on 2 August 2024, but the Supreme Court stayed that order on 14 August 2024 and directed that Rs. 158 crore received in the settlement be kept in escrow.BCCI submitted Form FA on 16 August 2024, asking the IRP to file it after the Supreme Court's final decision. The IRP responded that he would wait. The CoC was formed on 21 August 2024. On 26 September 2024, the Supreme Court ordered the IRP to maintain status quo and not convene any CoC meeting. On 23 October 2024, the Supreme Court allowed GLAS Trust's appeal, reinstating the CIRP and allowing the parties to seek withdrawal under the legal framework. The Court noted that the CoC had already been constituted.BCCI asked the IRP to file the withdrawal application on 11 November 2024, which was done on 14 November 2024. Objections were filed by GLAS Trust and Aditya Birla Finance. Riju Ravindran also filed an application to be made a party in the main case. On 10 February 2025, the NCLT held that since the CoC had been constituted on 21 August 2024, the withdrawal application must be placed before the CoC as per Regulation 30A(1)(b). This was challenged before the NCLAT.Appellants Riju Ravindran and BCCI argued that the settlement was completed and Form FA was submitted on 16 August 2024, before the CoC was formed, so Regulation 30A(1)(a) applied and CoC approval was not needed. They also said the IRP should have filed Form FA within three days, as per Regulation 30A(3). GLAS Trust countered that the CoC was constituted on 21 August 2024 and Form FA was actually filed on 14 November 2024, so Regulation 30A(1)(b) applied. It also noted that BCCI had told the IRP to wait until the Supreme Court's decision on 23 October 2024.The NCLAT rejected the appellants' contentions and held that since Form FA was filed on 14 November 2024, after the CoC's constitution on 21 August 2024, the provisions of Section 12A and Regulation 30A(1)(b) would apply. It also held that the IRP could not be blamed for delay in filing Form FA, as BCCI had itself asked the IRP to wait until the Supreme Court's decision.Regarding the alleged denial of hearing to Riju Ravindran, the Tribunal observed that he was present during the withdrawal proceedings and had also raised all arguments in the present appeal.Case no. – C.A. No. 6613/2025 Case Title – Riju Ravindran v. Pankaj SrivastavaClick Here To Read/Download Order

Byju's Insolvency : Supreme Court Issues Notice On Riju Ravindran's Plea Against NCLAT Mandating CoC Nod For CIRP Withdrawal

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

Byju's Insolvency : Supreme Court Issues Notice On Riju Ravindran's Plea Against NCLAT Mandating CoC Nod For CIRP Withdrawal

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers