NCLT forms first five-member bench to hear Subhash Chandra insolvency case
NCLT constitutes its first five-member bench to adjudicate Subhash Chandra's personal insolvency case involving claims over ₹22,000 crore.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has constituted a five-member bench — the first in its history — to adjudicate the personal insolvency case of Essel Group chairman Subhash Chandra, where creditor claims exceed ₹22,000 crore.
The unprecedented bench was formed after a two-member division bench failed to reach a majority decision on Chandra's proposed ₹6.5 crore repayment plan, despite referring the matter to a third member for a decisive opinion.
Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal, the tribunal's president, will lead the five-member bench. Other members include Bachu Venkat Balaram Das, Mahendra Khandelwal, Atul Chaturvedi, and Ravindra Chaturvedi. The bench is scheduled to commence hearings at 10:15 a.m. on Tuesday at the NCLT's Principal Bench.
The case has been marked by divergent judicial interpretations. The original division bench — comprising Member (Judicial) Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj and Member (Technical) Reena Sinha Puri — delivered a split verdict on the repayment plan. Bhardwaj had confined the plan's approval to creditors who voted in favour (about 80.8%), while allowing dissenting financial institutions and banks (roughly 19.2%) to pursue recovery independently.
The third member, in an order dated August 26, took a different approach, applying Section 115(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) uniformly. This approved the plan but extinguished the claims of all creditors, including dissenting banks, against Chandra as personal guarantor.
When the matter returned to the division bench, it concluded that no majority view had emerged. The bench observed that the third member had "consciously passed an independent order," and therefore no formal order could be issued at that stage, prompting referral to the tribunal's president.
Meanwhile, dissenting lenders, including LIC Housing Finance, Canara Bank, and Union Bank, moved the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) as a precautionary measure. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for these lenders, sought urgent hearing, arguing that the third member's order would "defeat the very purpose" of the IBC. NCLAT has listed the matter for hearing on Tuesday at 10:30 a.m.
The dispute centres on the interpretation of Section 79(2)(g) of the IBC and its interplay with Section 115(1), which governs creditor approval of repayment plans. The third member also disagreed with both division bench members on the adjudicating authority's jurisdiction to question the Resolution Professional's report under Section 112.