Summary – BYJU’S founder, Byju Raveendran, faces bankruptcy case.
• National Company Law Appellate Tribunal judge, Sharad Kumar Sharma, refuses to hear Raveendran’s argument.
• Sharma, former senior counsel for BCCI, stated he couldn’t hear the case as BCCI are the main beneficiaries.
• Ashok Bhushan, NCLAT chairperson, will now hear the case.
Byju Raveendran, the founder of BYJU’S, faced yet another setback when National Company Law Appellate Tribunal judge Sharad Kumar Sharma declined to hear his argument against the decision to file for bankruptcy against the edtech company.
According to Moneycontrol, Justice Sharma acknowledged in his July 29 ruling that he had previously served as senior counsel for the Board of Control For Cricket in India (BCCI).
The magazine cited Justice Sharma as adding, “I cannot take this up since they are the main beneficiaries of this order.”
Ashok Bhushan, the chairperson of the NCLAT (retired), will now hear the case.
Given that the NCLAT postponed Raveendran’s request for a member’s recusal, the Committee of Creditors may attempt to acquire BYJU’.
This occurs only a few days after the Karnataka High Court postponed hearing on Raveendran’s appeal contesting the National Company Law Tribunal’s (NCLT) decision to file for bankruptcy on behalf of the struggling edtech company.
The plea is scheduled for hearing by the Karnataka High Court on July 30.
Following the Indian cricket board’s plea to begin bankruptcy proceedings against the edtech company being granted by a recent order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Byju’s filed an NCLAT case.
“After reading over all of the case materials, I came to the conclusion that the BCCI would be the final beneficiary. I therefore don’t want to get engaged in this. I’m not going to listen to this. According to Justice Sharma, who was quoted in the Bar & Bench report, it would go to the chairman, who will choose the next date.
According to the Bar & Bench, Raveendran brought up the issue before NCLAT Delhi after the matter was postponed.
Raveendran moved the Karnataka High Court earlier this month in response to the NCLT initiating insolvency proceedings against BYJU’S on the BCCI’s plea over unpaid dues of approximately INR 158 Cr.
Before the Karnataka High Court, Raveendran contended that the startup will probably “force” hundreds of its employees to resign due to the insolvency procedures that have been started against it.
The dispute over the sponsorship rights of the Indian cricket teams’ jerseys led the BCCI to bring BYJU’S to the NCLT in September of last year, requesting the start of a corporate bankruptcy resolution procedure against the edtech business under section 9 of the bankruptcy & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
BYJU’S has been beset by issues for a while now, including declining sales, a lack of money that led to widespread layoffs, and legal issues with the NCLT and an investigation.
For a considerable amount of time, BYJU’S has been beset by issues, including declining sales, a lack of funding that led to widespread layoffs, legal issues with the NCLT, and an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs declared in June that an investigation into possible BYJU’S governance violations was still “ongoing.”
The edtech behemoth has been shut out of over 100 BYJU’S Tuition Centers (BTC) nationwide due to unpaid rent and power costs, according to a report published earlier this month by Inc42.
The Karnataka High Court was recently ordered by Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), a sovereign wealth fund that invests in BYJU’S, to require Raveendran to reveal and prevent the transfer of his personal assets. Up to $235.19 million in Raveendran’s personal assets have been claimed by QIA.
Raveendran filed a motion with NCLAT on July 23 to request an expedited hearing on the case. According to Bar & Bench, Justice Sharma had questioned why Raveendran had initially opted to go to the Karnataka High Court, then withdrawn the suit from there and went NCLAT as a last resort.
CONCLUSION : Byju Raveendran, founder of BYJU’S, faced a setback when National Company Law Appellate Tribunal judge Sharad Kumar Sharma declined to hear his argument against the edtech company’s bankruptcy filing, citing his previous role as senior counsel for BCCI.