What’s Next for Essel Group Chairman Subhash Chandra? NCLAT Schedules Key Hearings

Essel Group Chairman Subhash Chandra is embroiled in a significant legal battle as the NCLAT schedules hearings for his personal insolvency case. Following a controversial ruling by the NCLT, Chandra is challenging restrictions on his assets and the validity of creditor claims. With hearings set for October 29 and 30, the outcome could have major implications for his financial future. Stay tuned for updates on this unfolding story as Chandra seeks to navigate the complexities of insolvency law and creditor disputes.

By Narendra Chaudhary Sep 29, 2026, 15:46 IST

NCLAT Takes Action on Subhash Chandra's Plea

New Delhi: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has issued notices to creditors regarding a petition from Essel Group's Chairman, Subhash Chandra, with hearings set for October 29 and 30.

Chandra is contesting a decision made on September 1 by a five-member bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which had halted a ruling from a third judge concerning his personal insolvency case and prohibited him from selling his assets.

The NCLAT has instructed creditors who challenged the validity of Chandra's petition to submit their responses within a week.

Additionally, a three-member NCLAT panel has granted Chandra a week to respond to the creditors' replies.

The bench, which includes Officiating Chairperson Justice (Retd.) Yogesh Khanna and Technical Members Barun Mitra and Ajai Das Mehrotra, stated, "Let the notice be issued... we will file the reply regarding maintainability and stay within a week."

At the request of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing some creditors, the tribunal has combined a separate petition from creditors contesting the NCLT's approval of a settlement involving a payment of approximately Rs 6.5 crore against acknowledged claims of around Rs 22,006.57 crore with Chandra's appeal.

The NCLAT has scheduled October 29 and 30 for discussions on Chandra's requests for interim relief, allocating one day for his arguments and the other for creditor submissions.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Mehta proposed waiting for the outcome of the next hearing of the five-member NCLT bench, which is set for November 19.

This suggestion was met with opposition from advocate Dhruv Mehta, representing Subhash Chandra.

In the previous hearing on September 23, the five-member NCLT bench issued a notice to the CBI regarding Chandra's personal insolvency case and confirmed that the interim order preventing him from selling his property would remain in effect until a final decision is reached.

The CBI has filed an FIR against Chandra for allegedly inflating his net worth to secure loans from Life Insurance Corporation Housing Finance Limited (LICHFL), subsequently defaulting and causing a loss exceeding Rs 1,322 crore to the public-sector lender.

LICHFL's complaint, now part of the FIR, claims that Chandra provided inflated net-worth certificates to obtain approval and disbursement of two loans totaling Rs 980 crore.

In his NCLAT petition, Chandra contends that the NCLT's September 1, 2026 order exceeded its legal authority.

He has also raised concerns about the formation of the five-member NCLT bench.

Previously, a two-member bench had issued a split verdict on Chandra's personal insolvency resolution process in NCLT.

Member (Judicial) Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj approved Chandra's repayment plan of Rs 6.5 crore, deeming him eligible for relief under the insolvency framework for personal guarantors, while Member (Technical) Reeta Kohli disagreed, leading to a referral under Section 419(5) of the Companies Act, 2013.

This section outlines the procedure for resolving split verdicts by referring differing points to additional tribunal members for a majority decision.

The matter was later assigned to Nilesh Sharma, Member (Judicial), who agreed with Bhardwaj on key issues and upheld Chandra's repayment plan, which proposed settling claims of around Rs 22,006 crore for approximately Rs 6.5 crore.

However, the implementation of Sharma's order was subsequently stayed by a five-member NCLT bench, which barred Chandra from selling his assets pending further proceedings.