A five-member Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has stayed an August 25 order approving a ₹6.25-crore repayment plan proposed by Essel Group founder Subhash Chandra, observing that there was no clear majority view among the members who had earlier heard the matter.
The Bench also restrained Chandra, described in the order as the guarantor, from alienating any of his properties, either directly or indirectly, and issued notices to all parties in the proceedings.
The company petition, IB 97/ND/2022, was originally heard by a Division Bench comprising Member (Judicial) Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj and Member (Technical) Reena Sinha Puri.
Differences between the two members led to the matter being placed before the then NCLT President, who referred it to a third member for his opinion.The third member heard the matter on February 20, 2026, and pronounced the judgment on August 25.
The August 25 order was subsequently placed before the consequential Bench on August 31 for further orders.
After examining the orders passed by the three members, the five-member Bench noted that “there are differences” in their views.
“All said and done, no majority view has emerged in the matter. In the way, no order can be passed at this stage. Resultantly, we have no option but to make fresh reference to the honourable president in terms of the provisions of Section 4195,” the bench said. The Bench directed that notices be issued to all parties and ordered that the guarantor “shall not alienate the properties either directly or indirectly”.
The dispute relates to insolvency proceedings against Chandra in his capacity as a personal guarantor for debts of Essel/Zee-linked companies. Claims of about Rs 22,006 crore have been admitted against him, but this figure does not represent money personally borrowed by Chandra or loans originally extended on the strength of his personal guarantee. According to the background to the case, only about Rs 2,574 crore of the claims relate to loans for which Chandra had provided his personal guarantee at the time of the original borrowing, while several other guarantees were furnished subsequently as additional security.
The proceedings against Chandra arose following a default on a loan to Vivek Infracon from Indiabulls for which he had stood as guarantor. The proposed settlement of his personal-guarantor liability involves payment of about Rs 6.25 crore from his personal estate. The plan, however, also envisages around Rs 1,494 crore in payments by the principal borrowers, while creditors retain recovery avenues against securities and other available assets of the companies.
Creditors had challenged the extent of Chandra’s presently realisable assets, pointing to historical net-worth certificates showing a net worth of ₹45,888 crore in 2017 and ₹40,562 crore in 2018, against a presently disclosed net worth of about ₹31.79 crore. The repayment plan had received 80.81% voting support from creditors, although several lenders, including LIC Housing Finance, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, Canara Bank, RBL Bank and Union Bank, had opposed it.The latest order does not decide the merits of the repayment plan. It instead puts the August 25 approval in abeyance while the five-member Bench considers the conflicting views that emerged during the proceedings.
The case also needs to be distinguished from the broader recovery record under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. According to government data, creditors recovered about Rs 4.32 lakh crore through approved resolution plans up to March 2026. The Subhash Chandra matter concerns resolution of a personal guarantor’s liability and is therefore not representative of recoveries in corporate insolvency proceedings.