Litigation has gone too far: Supreme Court dismisses appeal against Glass Trust’s inclusion in Byju’s CoC

The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) ruling that restored the original Committee of Creditors (CoC), including Glass Trust Company LLC as a financial creditor, in the insolvency resolution process concerning Think & Learn Pvt Ltd. [Byju Raveendran Vs Aditya Birla Capital].A Bench of Justices Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi dismissed an appeal filed in the matter by Byju Raveendran, the founder and suspended director of Think & Learn."This is now too much. This litigation has gone far beyond… Perfect order. NCLT, NCLAT, we will not interfere....The inquiry initiated against the RP shall proceed further expeditiously in accordance with law," the Court said today. .The hearing was brief, with the Bench declining to entertain detailed submissions from counsel for Byju Raveendran. When allegations of collusion involving the Resolution Professional (RP) were raised, the Court responded, “Nothing. Dismissed.”.The controversy stems from the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) initiated against Think & Learn Pvt Ltd in July 2024 on a plea by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).Following admission of the insolvency petition, the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) issued a public announcement inviting claims. Among the creditors, Glass Trust Company LLC submitted claims exceeding ₹11,432 crore, while Aditya Birla Finance Ltd filed a claim of about ₹47.12 crore as a financial creditor.On August 21, 2024, the IRP constituted the Committee of Creditors comprising Glass Trust Company LLC, Aditya Birla Finance Ltd, Incred Financial Services Ltd and ICICI Bank Ltd. Glass Trust held an overwhelming voting share of over 99 per cent, while Aditya Birla Finance held around 0.41 per cent. .However, within days, the IRP undertook a drastic reconstitution of the CoC. He reclassified Aditya Birla Finance as an operational creditor and treated Glass Trust’s claim as contingent, thereby excluding both from the CoC. The reconstituted CoC, dated August 31, 2024, retained only Incred Financial Services as a financial creditor with 100 per cent voting share, despite it earlier holding a negligible share..This move triggered multiple applications before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), with creditors challenging the IRP’s power to alter the composition of the CoC after its initial constitution.The NCLT, by its order dated January 29, 2025, set aside the reconstituted CoC and restored the original CoC as constituted on August 21, 2024. It also restored Aditya Birla Finance’s status as a financial creditor and invalidated all resolutions passed by the reconstituted CoC.The tribunal held that the IRP Pankaj Srivastava, had no authority to reclassify creditors or reconstitute the CoC without approval of the adjudicating authority. It ordered an enquiry by Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) against the IRP. The NCLAT affirmed this view, emphasising that the role of the IRP is administrative and not adjudicatory. It held that once a CoC is constituted, its composition cannot be altered by the IRP on his own, and that there is no concept of a “provisional” CoC under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.The appellate tribunal also came down strongly on the conduct of the IRP, observing that his actions appeared intended to mislead the tribunal and were prejudicial to the insolvency process. .Byju Raveendran, the suspended director of the Think & Learn, challenged these findings before the Supreme Court, arguing that the initial constitution of the CoC was flawed and that the IRP’s actions amounted to a legitimate update based on verification of claims.His appeal has now been dismissed the Supreme Court. .Raveendran was represented by Senior Advocate Navin Pahwa.