Byju’s Insolvency Case: Supreme Court Rejects BCCI & Riju Ravindran’s Appeals on CIRP Withdrawal Rules

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed civil appeals by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and suspended Think & Learn director Riju Ravindran, upholding a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) ruling that any application to withdraw the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Think & Learn Pvt Ltd requires the support of 90% of its Committee of Creditors (CoC), LiveLaw reported.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan rejected the appellants’ contention that their withdrawal petition, filed on November 14, 2024, preceded the CoC’s constitution and was therefore exempt from creditor approval under Regulation 30A(1)(a) of the IBBI Rules.

CoC Approval Under IBC

The appeals challenged an April 17 NCLAT judgment that upheld a February 10, 2025 order from the NCLT Bengaluru directing the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) to place BCCI’s application for CIRP withdrawal under Section 12‑A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code before the CoC.

BCCI and Ravindran argued that the settlement of BCCI’s Rs 158 crore dues had been finalised on August 16, 2024 and that the prescribed Form FA was thus lodged before the CoC’s constitution on August 21, 2024. They further contended that the IRP should have filed Form FA within three days, per Regulation 30A(3).

Vedanta‑backed creditor GLAS Trust, which successfully appealed the initial CIRP suspension in October 2024, countered that the IRP complied with BCCI’s own instructions to await the Supreme Court’s October 23 decision and only filed Form FA on November 14, 2024, after the CoC was in place.

“This scheme was devised to facilitate Vedanta Ltd’s remittance of brand fees to Vedanta Resources when it faced a severe liquidity crisis,” Viceroy wrote, adding that regulators would need to remain silent for two years to avoid uncovering the paper‑only trading. The report warns that any regulatory intervention before FY 2027 could wipe out the lender group behind the NCD.

Vedanta’s spokesperson swiftly rebuffed the claims, stating, “All business activities of VSPL have been transparently disclosed and are in line with statutory norms. Loans between VSPL and Vedanta Ltd were executed in full compliance with applicable laws, corporate governance standards and both Vedanta Ltd and VSPL have consistently reported accurate loan terms, interest rates and collateral.” The company urged stakeholders to rely solely on verified disclosures and audited financials.

This attack is the latest salvo in Viceroy’s campaign against mining magnate Anil Agarwal’s Vedanta empire. On July 9, 2025, Viceroy disclosed a short position against debt issued by Vedanta Resources, the UK‑based holding company, alleging capital drains from the Indian unit.

Vedanta had dismissed that report as “a malicious combination of selective misinformation,” claiming no prior engagement from Viceroy. The short seller countered that it has yet to receive substantive responses to its queries.

In the meantime, Vedanta’s management maintains that its corporate structures and intercompany loans adhere strictly to India’s FEMA, Companies Act, PMLA and AML frameworks.