Archive · 1 Sep 2026
NCLT Stays Subhash Chandra’s Repayment Plan, Bars Asset Sales
Subhash Chandra offered creditors Rs 6.25 crore to settle claims of about Rs 22,006 crore.
An earlier tribunal order approved the plan on August 25.
A larger five-member tribunal has now paused that approval.
It said the earlier tribunal members did not reach a clear majority agreement.
Chandra has also been told not to sell or transfer his properties while the case continues.
Many creditors supported the plan because they believed bankruptcy could produce an even smaller recovery.
Other lenders said the proposed payment was far too small and questioned the voting process.
The dispute involves guarantees Chandra gave for loans taken by companies linked to the Essel Group.
The tribunal will hear the parties before deciding how the case should proceed.
A five-member NCLT bench stayed approval of Subhash Chandra’s Rs 6.25-crore repayment plan against admitted claims of Rs 22,006.57 crore.
The bench barred Chandra from selling, transferring, encumbering or otherwise dealing with his properties, directly or indirectly.
The stay followed differing opinions among the original two-member bench and third member Nilesh Sharma, leaving no clear majority.
The plan had support from creditors holding 80.814% of the voting share, while dissenting lenders held 19.186%.
The claims arose from personal guarantees Chandra gave for loans taken by Essel Group-linked companies, rather than loans he personally borrowed.
- Who
- Zee Group founder and Essel Group chairman Subhash Chandra, his creditors, and the National Company Law Tribunal; dissenting lenders have also challenged the plan before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.
- What
- A five-member NCLT bench stayed the order approving Chandra’s Rs 6.25-crore repayment plan and restricted dealings with his properties.
- When
- The stay was issued on Tuesday, September 1, after the plan’s August 25 approval order; the insolvency plea was admitted in 2024.
- Where
- Before the NCLT, with a related challenge before the NCLAT.
- Why
- The larger bench found that the earlier members had expressed materially different views and that no clear majority had emerged.
Dissenting Lenders
Chandra and Plan Supporters
Adequacy of recovery
Dissenting Lenders
Lenders including LIC Housing Finance, HDFC Bank and Canara Bank argued that recovering Rs 6.25 crore against claims exceeding Rs 22,000 crore was negligible, unviable or legally problematic.
Chandra and Plan Supporters
The earlier NCLT order said the plan could produce a better result than bankruptcy because Chandra’s estate was described as having very few assets of negligible value.
Voting process
Dissenting Lenders
Dissenting lenders questioned the voting process and alleged that entities linked to Chandra or his associates held a substantial share of the votes supporting the plan.
Chandra and Plan Supporters
The proposal received 80.814% support, and the earlier tribunal said it would generally defer to creditors’ commercial judgment when legal requirements were met.
Claims and guarantees
Dissenting Lenders
Creditors treated the admitted claims of Rs 22,006.57 crore as the relevant scale of liabilities and sought greater scrutiny of Chandra’s assets and financial position.
Chandra and Plan Supporters
Chandra said the figure was widely misread because it reflected guarantees for Essel Group companies’ borrowings, not money he personally borrowed; he put the personal-guarantee claims at about Rs 3,990 crore.
Asset investigation
Dissenting Lenders
Lenders sought forensic investigation and asset tracing, citing the gap between historical net-worth certificates and the assets recorded during insolvency.
Chandra and Plan Supporters
The earlier NCLT view was that old net-worth certificates alone did not prove concealment or diversion and that a forensic audit was not mandatory before considering the plan.
- Proposed payment
- Rs 6.25 crore to creditors, plus Rs 25 lakh toward insolvency resolution process costs.
- Admitted claims
- Rs 22,006.57 crore.
- Plan support
- Creditors holding 80.814% of the voting share supported the proposal.
- Dissenting share
- Opposing lenders held 19.186% of the voting share.
- Asset restriction
- Chandra cannot sell, transfer, alienate, encumber or otherwise deal with his properties during the proceedings.
- Basis of claims
- The claims arose from personal guarantees for loans taken by Essel Group-linked companies.
- Current assets cited
- The insolvency process recorded approximately Rs 31.79 crore in current assets.
Sources
NCLT Stays Order On Subhash Chandra's Rs 6.25-Cr Repayment, Bars Property Sale
NCLT Stays Subhash Chandra Repayment Plan, ₹6.25 Crore Settlement Against ₹22,006 Crore Claims Put On Hold
NCLT bars Subhash Chandra from selling assets as lenders challenge Rs 6.5 cr settlement
Zee founder Subhash Chandra’s Rs 6.25-cr settlement plan against Rs 22,006 cr claims on hold
NCLT stays Subhash Chandra’s Rs 6.25-crore repayment plan, bars sale of guarantor’s assets
Five-member NCLT bench stays order approving Subhash Chandra’s Rs 6.25 cr repayment plan
Tribunal Stays Subhash Chandra's Rs 6.25 Crore Plan: What Happens Now?