NCLT Delhi ne Essel Group ke founder Dr. Subhash Chandra ke personal insolvency case mein ₹6.25 crore ke repayment plan par filhaal rok laga di hai. Yeh faisla 1 September 2026 ko newly constituted five-member NCLT Delhi Bench ne diya.

Proposed repayment plan ke tahat creditors ko ₹22,006.57 crore ke admitted claims ke mukable sirf ₹6.25 crore milna tha. Iske alawa insolvency process ke kharch ke liye ₹25 lakh ka provision rakha gaya tha.

Five-member Bench ki aguvai NCLT President Justice Anupinder Singh ne ki. Bench mein Judicial Members Bachu Venkat Balaram Das aur Mahendra Khandelwal ke saath Technical Members Atul Chaturvedi aur Ravindra Chaturvedi shamil hain.

Bench ne August 25, 2026 ke pehle ke order ki operation ko stay kar diya. Iska matlab hai ki us order ke basis par repayment plan ko filhaal implement nahi kiya ja sakta.

Bench ne Subhash Chandra ko guarantor ke roop mein apni properties ko directly ya indirectly sell, transfer, alienate ya kisi anya tareeke se deal karne se bhi rok diya hai.

Creditors ki taraf se Solicitor General Tushar Mehta ne guarantor ki assets ko protect karne ki zarurat par zor diya. Iske baad Bench ne property alienation par restriction lagayi aur parties ko notices issue kiye.

Case mein Deadlock kaise hua?

Yeh matter five-member Bench ke paas isliye aaya kyunki pehle ke NCLT proceedings mein repayment plan ko lekar clear majority opinion nahi ban paya tha.

Original two-member Bench mein Judicial Member Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj aur Technical Member Reena Sinha Puri shamil the. Dono Members ne repayment plan par alag-alag views diye.

Bhardwaj ne repayment plan ko approve karne ke paksh mein opinion diya, jabki Reena Sinha Puri ne proposal ko reject kiya.

Matter ko baad mein third Member Nilesh Sharma ke paas bheja gaya. 25 August ke order mein Sharma ne repayment plan ko approve karne ke paksh mein view diya aur kaha ki required statutory voting threshold meet ho chuka tha.

Lekin jab matter original Bench ke paas wapas aaya, tab majority position ko lekar issue bana raha. Isi disagreement ke baad matter ko larger five-member Bench ke saamne rakha gaya.

Repayment Plan mein kitni rakam thi?

Proposed plan ke tahat:

Admitted claims: ₹22,006.57 crore

Creditors ko proposed payment: ₹6.25 crore

Insolvency process costs: ₹25 lakh

Creditors ki voting share ke hisab se approval: 80.814%

Is calculation ke hisab se admitted claims ke mukable proposed repayment bahut chhota tha aur lagbhag 99.9% ka haircut banta tha.

Creditors ke Voting ka kya role tha?

Available reports ke mutabik, creditors representing 80.814% voting share ne repayment plan ke favour mein vote kiya tha.

Lekin kuch creditors ne plan ka virodh kiya aur proceedings ke dauran repayment plan, voting process aur claims se jude alag-alag issues uthaye gaye.

Third Member Nilesh Sharma ne kuch individual claims ko bhi examine kiya tha. Reports ke mutabik, 960 individuals aur anya 300 individuals se jude claims par supporting material ko lekar questions examine kiye gaye.

Ab kya hoga?

Five-member NCLT Bench ne August 25 ke order ko filhaal operation mein aane se rok diya hai. Parties ko notices issue kiye gaye hain aur matter ko further hearing ke liye rakha gaya hai.

Is stage par ₹6.25 crore repayment plan ko final implementation ke roop mein treat nahi kiya ja sakta. Five-member Bench ke further proceedings ke baad hi matter ki next legal direction clear hogi.

Case ka title hai:

Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited vs Dr Subhash Chandra

Yeh case personal insolvency proceedings, personal guarantees, creditor claims aur Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code ke interpretation se juda hua hai.

Disclaimer

Yeh report available public information aur published news reports ke aadhar par taiyar ki gayi hai. Is report mein diye gaye legal proceedings, financial figures, tribunal proceedings aur case-related details ko public records aur available reports se cross-check kiya gaya hai.

Is report ke liye primary reference LiveLaw ki published report hai, jabki additional verification ke liye NCLT, IBBI, India Today, Business Standard aur PTI/ThePrint jaise sources ki available information ko dekha gaya hai.

Case se jude final legal conclusions competent judicial authority ke further orders par depend karenge. Is article ko legal advice, legal opinion ya kisi party ke favour ya against final conclusion ke roop mein nahi liya jana chahiye.

Source references:
LiveLaw | NCLT | IBBI | India Today | Business Standard | PTI/ThePrint

StoryRealA ka uddeshya available information ko readers ke liye simple aur understandable format mein present karna hai. Agar kisi source ya rights holder ko content, attribution ya reference se sambandhit koi concern ho, to appropriate correction ya clarification ke liye humse contact kiya ja sakta hai.