“The grievance of the appellant can be redressed by issuing a direction to the tribunal… on the application which has already been reserved, to decide the said application as early as possible, but preferably within a period of one week from the date of passing of this order,” said Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain.
“It is made clear to the parties, as well as to the learned tribunal, that while disposing of this appeal, we have not made any observation anywhere in the order on the merits of the case. The learned tribunal has to take an independent decision regarding the application that has been filed,” he added.
Senior Advocate Arun Kathpalia, representing Ravindran, argued that any action related to the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), including the reconstitution of the committee of creditors (CoC), would be prejudicial to the interests of the company’s promoters. Kathpalia emphasised the urgency of the matter, as the CoC meeting is scheduled for Saturday.
On January 8, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) reserved its orders on the petitions filed by Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance seeking to be included in the CoC of Byju’s parent, along with the Indian cricket board’s application to withdraw its insolvency petition against the firm.
Discover the stories of your interest
However, the order on January 29 was only pronounced in the matter regarding the Glas Trust case where the tribunal inducted Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance onto the CoC of the edtech firm, by setting aside the reconstitution of the panel carried out by the company’s interim resolution professional (IRP) on August 31. Kathpalia argued that the withdrawal application was submitted before the CoC was formed, and therefore, it does not require CoC approval. However, Glas Trust countered by stating that the withdrawal application was filed solely with the interim resolution professional (IRP) and not with the tribunal. The arguments regarding the maintainability of the application have already been presented before the NCLT.