Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) has said it will continue pursuing repayment of debt and recovery of the arbitral award in its favour, while rejecting Byju Raveendran’s allegation that the recent contempt order was being used as a pressure tactic to force a settlement.
In a formal response to Raveendran, a QIA spokesperson said, “QIA was pleased by the result of the contempt hearing in Singapore. The six-month prison sentence against Byju arose from his serious wrongdoing, including violation of a global freezing order on his assets.”
The statement comes amid ongoing settlement discussions between the founder, QIA, GLAS Trust and other stakeholders. However, Raveendran had alleged that the agency was resorting to pressure tactics during negotiations. Responding to this, QIA said, “We intend to respect the confidentiality of settlement discussions; however, no settlement appears achievable.”
Major backers
QIA has been among the major backers of the edtech company. It first invested over $150 million to support the company’s international expansion, followed by another $250 million investment in 2022 through a flat funding round. In the same year, the company also entered into a Middle East and North Africa (MENA) partnership to launch a research and development centre in Doha.
Since then, however, the investor and lenders have pursued legal action across multiple jurisdictions to recover dues. QIA secured an emergency arbitral order from the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), freezing Raveendran’s international assets. It later approached the Karnataka High Court to enforce a $235 million arbitral award in August 2025, followed by an interim asset freeze order in September 2025.
The prison sentence follows Raveendran’s failure to comply with Singapore court orders linked to disclosure of his assets.
Legal action is also underway in the US , where lenders represented by GLAS Trust are seeking repayment of the $1.2 billion Term Loan B issued in 2021. The founder and affiliated entities have been accused of moving $533 million from the loan proceeds out of the US, allegedly in violation of the loan terms.