- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
BCCI Pleads NCLT To Withdraw Insolvency Petition Against Byju’s
BCCI Pleads NCLT To Withdraw Insolvency Petition Against Byju’s
The matter will be heard on 18 November.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has approached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) seeking the withdrawal of its insolvency petition against Byju's.
The move follows the recent Supreme Court ruling, quashing the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order allowing a Rs.158 crore settlement between the cricket board (operational creditor) and the debt-ridden Think & Learn Pvt Ltd, the parent of the ed-tech firm.
(In August, the Chennai branch of the NCLAT approved Byju's founders' settlement payment owed to BCCI to avoid bankruptcy of the firm).
Meanwhile, Byju's lenders have opposed BCCI's withdrawal application.
A counsel for Aditya Birla Finance (ABF), one of Byju's creditors, stated before the NCLT, “The committee of creditors (CoC) must be formed to take a decision.”
However, BCCI submitted that its settlement with Byju's happened before the CoC was formed.
Appearing on behalf of the BCCI, senior advocate CK Nandakumar stated, "We filed an application even before the constitution of any CoC. So, in terms of the Supreme Court judgment, this would have to be considered as a pre-CoC situation.”
On the other hand, ABF submitted that the apex court instructed the cricket board to deposit the funds with the CoC, so it could not claim the money held in an escrow account.
The court had directed that Rs.158 crore and accrued interest, which BCCI deposited in a separate escrow account as per its August order, would be deposited with the CoC. The latter would maintain it until further directions from the NCLT were given.
Meanwhile, ABF and Glas Trust filed an application seeking the removal of the interim resolution professional (IRP) and reconstituting the CoC.