RP’s counsel contended that Glas Trust’s claim to be included in the CoC was contested on account of a pending New York court case regarding the TLB extended to BYJU’S
The tribunal also reserved its order on BCCI’s plea, which seeks to withdraw the insolvency petition against the edtech startup
Glas Trust also argued that the RP did not have the authority to reconstitute a CoC once the committee was formed, adding that the power to do so rests with the NCLT
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has reportedly reserved its order on the appeals filed by creditors of BYJU’S, Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance, seeking to be added to the committee of creditors (CoC).
As per Economic Times, the tribunal also reserved its order on the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) plea, withdrawing the insolvency petition against the edtech startup.
The appeals pertain to the insolvency resolution professional (RP) of BYJU’S, Pankaj Srivastava, removing Glas Trust and Aditya Birla Finance from the reconstituted CoC.
During the hearing on Wednesday, the counsel for Srivastava told the tribunal that the CoC was formed provisionally due to pressure from Glas Trust.
“A letter was issued to all the financial creditors stating that their claims are not fully admitted and are subject to further verification. The pressure on the RP began from day one, with pressure especially from Glas Trust,” Srivastava reportedly said.
In retort, the NCLT bench questioned the contention that the resolution professional was under pressure, saying that whether the RP was so vulnerable that it could be easily influenced by others.
“You have been given enormous power by this court. You are representing us. You should come to us and tell us that somebody is putting pressure on you. You are not an independent authority; you are acting on our behalf, please understand that,” the bench reportedly added.
Arguing before the tribunal, the counsel for Srivastava contended that Glas Trust’s claim to be included in the CoC was contested on account of a pending New York court case regarding the term loan B (TLB) extended to the edtech major. However, Glas Trust’s advocate Srinivasa Raghavan responded back by saying that the RP was well aware of these cases before the initial constitution of the CoC.
Raghavan further argued that the RP did not have the authority to reconstitute a CoC once the committee was formed, adding that the power to do so rests with the NCLT. “We must be inducted into the CoC, and the CoC must be reconstituted,” Glas Trust’s counsel reportedly added.
Meanwhile, Aditya Birla Finance’s counsel Pramod Nair representing Aditya Birla argued that the resolution profession can revise the amount but not the status of the committee.
“The law is unequivocally clear that once the status of a creditor as a financial creditor is determined, there cannot be any further unilateral reclassification by the IRP. They will have to come before your Lordships for this purpose, which has not happened at all,” Nair reportedly said.
The latest developments follow Srivastava, in November, requesting the NCLT to consider BCCI’s application to withdraw insolvency proceedings against BYJU’S. Subsequently, in December, Glas Trust approached the tribunal to seek rejection of the BCCI’s plea on the grounds of maintainability of the application.
Pitching for its case, Glas Trust then argued that BCCI’s withdrawal application should be presented before the CoC first, followed by a 90% vote. Only then could the BCCI plea be brought before the NCLT, added Glas then. To this, Srivastava’s counsel had then argued that voting was not required as the application was initially filed by the BCCI even before the CoC was formed.
