In a fresh development in the personal insolvency case involving Zee founder Subhash Chandra, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has constituted a five-member Bench to reconsider the dispute after finding that no majority verdict had emerged on Chandra’s repayment plan to creditors [India Bulls Vs Subhash Chandra].
The development follows the NCLT’s conclusion on Monday that the opinion delivered by the third member in the matter differed materially from the views expressed by both members of the original two-member Bench. As a result, the Tribunal held that the repayment plan could not be treated as having been approved and referred the matter afresh to the NCLT President under Section 419(5) of the Companies Act, 2013.
NCLT President Justice (retd) Anupinder Singh Grewal has constituted a 5-member bench comprising himself, Judicial Members Bachu Venkat Balaram Das and Mahendra Khandelwal, and Technical Members Atul Chaturvedi and Ravindra Chaturvedi. The special bench will hear the matter at 10.15 AM on September 1.
The dispute arose from a split verdict delivered on September 3, 2025, by Judicial Member Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj and Technical Member Reena Sinha Puri.
Bhardwaj had approved Chandra’s repayment plan but limited its binding effect to creditors who had supported it. He allowed dissenting banks and financial institutions to independently pursue recovery of their dues.
Puri, however, rejected the plan altogether, citing serious procedural violations in the personal insolvency resolution process. She also questioned the participation of entities allegedly associated with Chandra in the creditor voting process and raised concerns regarding the conduct of the resolution professional.
The matter was then referred to third member Nilesh Sharma. In a detailed 144-page opinion delivered on August 25, Sharma approved the repayment plan but differed from Bhardwaj on the treatment of dissenting creditors.
Sharma held that an approved repayment plan could not be applied selectively and must bind all creditors, irrespective of whether they had voted in favour of or against it. He also excluded certain claims filed through Anil Kumar on behalf of 960 individuals and Sunil Jain on behalf of 300 individuals, directing that the corresponding repayment amount be redistributed among the remaining eligible creditors.
The original Bench, however, held that these differences materially altered the operation of the repayment plan.
The tribunal pointed out a core conflict: while the original judicial opinion limited the repayment plan to consenting creditors and let dissenting banks pursue recovery, the Third Member’s ruling approved a blanket plan that extinguished all creditor claims.
Holding that the third member had effectively expressed an independent view rather than concurring with either of the two original opinions, the Tribunal said no statutory majority had emerged.
The Tribunal has clarified that the August 25 opinion of the third member has neither been recalled nor reversed. However, it did not crystallise into a final order approving Chandra’s repayment plan due to the absence of a majority view.
The formation of the larger Bench is expected to bring fresh consideration to the long-running insolvency dispute. The development may also impact the appeal currently pending before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which could be rendered infructuous in light of the fresh proceedings before the NCLT.
The post Subhash Chandra insolvency: NCLT Forms 5-member bench after no consensus on repayment plan appeared first on India Legal.