Subhash Chandra debt: NCLT stays previous order against media baron, issues notices to him and lenders in ₹6.5 crore repayment case
At present, the matter is placed before special five-member NCLT bench after there were differences in the orders passed by 3 members hearing the case.
- Sep 1, 2026,
- Updated Sep 1, 2026 10:57 AM IST
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Tuesday issued a stay on the previous order under which a ₹6.5 crore repayment plan against admitted claims of more than ₹22,000 crore against media baron and Zee Entertainment founder Subhash Chandra was approved.
The NCLT special bench clarified that the tie-breaker judge's approval of Chandra's resolution plan is not the final or majority view, India Today reported. At present, the matter is placed before special five-member NCLT bench after there were differences in the orders passed by 3 members hearing the case.
MUST READ | 'Giving Zee free service, they don't pay me salary': Subhash Chandra says he doesn't own any assets
The repayment plan offered ₹6.25 crore to creditors and ₹25 lakh towards process costs against admitted claims of ₹22,006.57 crore. Despite the 99.97% haircut, creditors holding 80.814% of the voting share approved the plan.
The NCLT special bench also said that he, as the guarantor, shall not alienate any of his properties directly or indirectly, while issuing notices to Subhash Chandra as well as lenders in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) repayment case.
DON'T MISS | NCLT sends Subhash Chandra insolvency plan back to chairperson as benches fail to reach majority
Referring to Section 419(5) of the Companies Act, the bench said that "no majority view emerges" despite reference to a third member.
On August 25, an NCLT bench gave a split verdict on the approval of the media baron's repayment plan. Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma supported the approval of the repayment plan, stating that the required majority of creditors voted in its favour. Sharma maintained that opposition by some creditors or objections concerning Chandra's financial affairs, by themselves, did not make the plan not worth approving.
The tribunal further mentioned lapses in admitting claims pertaining to 960 individuals through Anil Kumar and 300 individuals through Sunil Jain on the basis of Chandra's verbal assurances. Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma held that these unsupported claims shouldn't have been admitted but found that the lapse did not adversely impact the entire insolvency process.
Date of the hearing will be made clear once written order is issued by the bench.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on Tuesday issued a stay on the previous order under which a ₹6.5 crore repayment plan against admitted claims of more than ₹22,000 crore against media baron and Zee Entertainment founder Subhash Chandra was approved.
The NCLT special bench clarified that the tie-breaker judge's approval of Chandra's resolution plan is not the final or majority view, India Today reported. At present, the matter is placed before special five-member NCLT bench after there were differences in the orders passed by 3 members hearing the case.
MUST READ | 'Giving Zee free service, they don't pay me salary': Subhash Chandra says he doesn't own any assets
The repayment plan offered ₹6.25 crore to creditors and ₹25 lakh towards process costs against admitted claims of ₹22,006.57 crore. Despite the 99.97% haircut, creditors holding 80.814% of the voting share approved the plan.
The NCLT special bench also said that he, as the guarantor, shall not alienate any of his properties directly or indirectly, while issuing notices to Subhash Chandra as well as lenders in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) repayment case.
DON'T MISS | NCLT sends Subhash Chandra insolvency plan back to chairperson as benches fail to reach majority
Referring to Section 419(5) of the Companies Act, the bench said that "no majority view emerges" despite reference to a third member.
On August 25, an NCLT bench gave a split verdict on the approval of the media baron's repayment plan. Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma supported the approval of the repayment plan, stating that the required majority of creditors voted in its favour. Sharma maintained that opposition by some creditors or objections concerning Chandra's financial affairs, by themselves, did not make the plan not worth approving.
The tribunal further mentioned lapses in admitting claims pertaining to 960 individuals through Anil Kumar and 300 individuals through Sunil Jain on the basis of Chandra's verbal assurances. Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma held that these unsupported claims shouldn't have been admitted but found that the lapse did not adversely impact the entire insolvency process.
Date of the hearing will be made clear once written order is issued by the bench.