&w=3840&q=100)
NCLAT rejects Byju's plea on Aakash shareholding status quo directive
A two-member Bench of the appellate tribunal, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and technical member Jatindranath Swain, said the NCLT's order was a 'consensual' and 'interlocutory' direction, and did not warrant appellate intervention at this stage.
'Since the impugned order takes the shape of an interlocutory order, which is not deciding any of the rights of the parties, coupled with the fact that the order takes the shape of a consenting order, no interference is called for,' the Bench noted.
Aakash shareholding row linked to equity raising
The dispute stems from equity fundraising plans by AESL, in which TLPL holds a 25 per cent stake. TLPL's RP moved the NCLAT after the NCLT's Chennai Bench passed an interim order on March 27 directing the maintenance of status quo in the company's shareholding structure.
A challenge to this order by AESL led to a Karnataka High Court judgment on April 8, which set aside the NCLT's interim directive and remanded the case for fresh hearing. At the NCLT's subsequent hearing on April 30, TLPL's counsel Abhinav Vasisht argued that the company's stake was being diluted despite the previous directive and raised concerns over hypothecation of AESL assets and alterations to the Articles of Association that protected TLPL's interests. Also Read:
Due to the complexity of the submissions and the court's approaching summer break, the NCLT passed a consent order maintaining the current shareholding pattern until TLPL's application for interim relief could be fully heard.
Challenging this consent order, TLPL's RP approached the NCLAT. However, the appellate tribunal ruled that the directive was non-final and did not infringe upon substantive rights. 'Thus, the instant Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 68 / 2025 lacks merits and the same is accordingly dismissed,' the order stated.
The development is the latest in a series of legal entanglements involving Byju's. The Supreme Court has admitted the pleas but stayed the NCLT proceedings against them, directing parties to maintain status quo for two weeks pending further hearings.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Hindustan National Glass: NCLAT decides against change of RP, directs NCLT to decide on bids
The insolvency appellate tribunal NCLAT has set aside NCLT 's direction to change the resolution professional of debt-ridden Hindusthan National Glass Industries (HNG) and asked it to take a decision on the bids as per the Supreme Court 's directions. A three-member NCLAT bench gave a go-ahead to the Kolkata Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to decide on the approval of bids for Hindusthan National Glass Industries in accordance with the directions passed by the Supreme Court. "The adjudicating authority (NCLT) may proceed to hear and decide the plan approval application, as per the directions of Supreme Court dated May 16, 2025," NCLAT said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Moose Approaches Girl At Bus Stop In Dhaka - Watch What Happens Happy in Shape Undo Over the resolution professional, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) said there was "no majority opinion on Point No.3, i.e. replacement of the RP". In this matter, the Supreme Court, in a judgement on May 16, 2025 directed the lenders' body, the CoC (committee of creditors) of Hindusthan National Glass to consider for approval of the resolution plan of Independent Sugar Corporation Ltd within two weeks. Live Events The apex court has also directed NCLT to complete the CIRP (corporate insolvency resolution process) of Hindusthan National Glass, within six weeks from May 16. CIRP against Hindusthan National Glass & Industries commenced on October 10, 2021 and Girish Siriram Juneja was appointed the RP. He had issued expression of interest (EoI) inviting resolution plans, based on which bids submitted by AGI Greenpac was approved by the CoC with 98 per cent vote shares on October 27, 2022. However, Soneko Marketing, an operational creditor of the company approached NCLT, praying for removal of the RP. Meanwhile, NCLT vide order dated April 28, 2023 approved the resolution plan of AGI Greenpac. This was challenged before the NCLAT by several parties, including Independent Sugar Corporation Ltd, which was also a resolution applicant. The NCLAT on September 18, 2023 dismissed all petitions against NCLT order finalising AGI Greenpac bid. Aggrieved by this, Soneko Marketing and Independent Sugar Corporation approached the Supreme Court, which vide its judgment on January 29, 2025, set aside the NCLT order as well as the order of appellate tribunal approving the resolution plan of AGI Greenpac. The Supreme Court held that as prior approval by the fair trade regulator CCI as required by Section 31 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, has not been obtained by AGI Greenpac, hence its bid could not have been approved. The apex court also issued directions to reconsider the bid of Independent Sugar Corporation or any other resolution plans that possessed the requisite CCI approval as on October 28, 2022. Later, in consequence of the order of the Supreme Court dated January 29, 2025, the resolution plan of Independent Sugar Corporation was approved on February 4, 2025. Meanwhile, on March 7, 2025, Soneko Marketing, the operational creditor filed an Intervention Petition seeking intervention as well as removal of the RP. However, on the plea, a two-member bench of the tribunal differed and on April 30, 2025, two separate orders were passed by judicial member and technical member. Following this, a reference was made to the NCLT president, who referred it to a third member, who on June 10, 2025 gave its opinion. Aggrieved by these orders, appels were filed before the appellate tribunal NCLAT. Meanwhile, a review petition was also filed before the Supreme Court for reviewing the judgment dated January 29, 2025. Passing an order on this the apex court on May 16, 2025 directed the CoC to consider for approval of resolution plan of Independent Sugar Corporation within two weeks. Meanwhile, the NCLAT also passed orders on Jul 8, 2025 over the removal of RP, setting aside an earlier order of NCLT in this regard.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
HPTDC urges review of HP govt's decision to outsource loss-making hotels
Before deciding to outsource operations of 14 loss-making hotels, the state Cabinet did not consult the Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation (HPTDC), whose board of directors had pressed for viability/ feasibility study of loss making hotels, said HPTDC chairman RS Bali on Friday. HPTDC chairman RS Bali said the corporation runs without state grants and still increased its turnover from ₹ 78 crore to ₹ 109 crore in 2.5 years. He said with renovation support, turnover could exceed ₹ 200 crore. (Shutterstock) Addressing a press conference in Shimla, Bali, who also chairs the state's Tourism Development Board, urged the government to reconsider, saying the corporation could turn the properties around with renovation and internal effort. The Cabinet approved the outsourcing plan on June 28 and directives were issued on July 9. The 14 properties in question include Kashmir House (Dharamsala), Roscommon Old (Kasauli), Sarvari (Kullu), Apple Blossom (Fagu), Shiwalik (Parwanoo), Ulh (Jogindernagar), Hill Top (Swarghat), Lakeview (Bilaspur), Bhagal (Darlaghat), Mamleshwar (Chindi-Mandi), Giriganga (Kharapatthar-Shimla), Chanshal (Rohru), Tourist Inn (Rajgarh-Sirmaur) and Wayside Amenity (Bhararighat-Solan). Bali requested time for feasibility studies before outsourcing decisions are finalised. 'We respect the government's authority. Under Article 79 of the Articles of Association, HPTDC is bound to follow government directives. But we also request that the government reviews its decision after allowing us to complete a proper visibility and viability study,' he said. He emphasised that HPTDC runs without state grants and still increased its turnover from ₹78 crore to ₹109 crore in 2.5 years. He said with renovation support, turnover could exceed ₹200 crore. Bali said he had also written to chief minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu seeking funds specifically for renovation and the CM had given in-principle approval. 'The CM assured us that our renovation project would be included in the Asian Development Bank (ADB) funding plan,' he said. Bali added that HPTDC's hotels, built since 1972, are pride assets. 'We don't just serve food, we spread joy,' he said. 'Thousands of employees serve thousands of rooms across Himachal, and lakhs of tourists feel the warmth of our hospitality. When VIPs like the President or Prime Minister visit, it's our staff that provides their catering,' Bali said. On the relocation of HPTDC's head office to Kangra, he said the board approved it before it went to the Cabinet. He refused to comment on a recent report that the chief secretary did not pay for a private party hosted at an HPTDC hotel
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
NCLT clears Yatra Online's amalgamation scheme involving six subsidiaries
Yatra Online Ltd on Friday announced that National Company Law Tribunal ( NCLT ), Mumbai Bench approved its petition for amalgamation of its six wholly-owned subsidiaries . Marking a significant development for the Indian travel-tech sector, this scheme involves the merger of the following six entities into Yatra Online Limited: Yatra TG Stays Private Limited Yatra Hotel Solutions Private Limited Yatra for Business Private Limited Yatra Corporate Hotel Solutions Private Limited Private Limited Yatra Online Freight Services Private Limited This move aims to streamline operations, eliminate duplication of efforts, and enhance overall efficiency across business verticals. In its order, the NCLT directed the amalgamating companies and Yatra Online to issue formal notices to a range of regulatory bodies, including the Central Government, Reserve Bank of India , Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Income Tax Authorities, Registrar of Companies, and the Competition Commission of India, among others. These authorities have been given a window of 30 days from the date of receipt of the notices to submit their representations or objections, if any. The companies are also required to file affidavits confirming the completion of notice delivery and publication. Live Events The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for August 13, 2025.
