Supreme Court Declines To Restrain Formation Of CoC In Byju's Insolvency Proceedings
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
20 Aug 2024 1:24 PM GMT
![Supreme Court Declines To Restrain Formation Of CoC In Byjus Insolvency Proceedings Supreme Court Declines To Restrain Formation Of CoC In Byjus Insolvency Proceedings](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2024/08/20/750x450_556594-byjus-app-sc.webp)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (August 20) refused to pass orders to restrain the Resolution Professional from forming a Committee of Creditors for ed-tech company Byju's in the insolvency proceedings against it.
Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singvhi, representing Byju's, mentioned the matter today morning before Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, saying that the previous order of the Supreme Court freezing the settlement with the BCCI has the effect of reviving the proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal.
When CJI said that the matter is being taken up on August 23, Singhvi requested that the CoC be not constituted in the meantime.
"The stay of the order would mean that the CIRP would be revived. Normally, the CoC will be constituted at the end. If CoC is constituted, then I will have to file a [Section] 12 A [IBC] application...RP should not constitute a CoC before Friday, that's all I am saying," Singhvi said.
Supporting Singhvi, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, for the BCCI, said, "The matter will become allowed without hearing if the CoC is constituted." "The matter will become infructuous if they create a CoC in two days," Singhvi added.
CJI agreed to hear the matter on Thursday however did not pass any order. "We are hearing the matter," he said.
"Very well my lord. We have made our concerns clear. Let us see if they will go and create the CoC in two days," Singhvi said.
On August 14, the Supreme Court had stayed the NCLAT order passed on August 2 approving the settlement between Byju's and the BCCI over the due of Rs 158 crores. The Court passed the order while issuing notice on an appeal by a US-based lender Glas Trust Company LLC which opposed the settlement.