How Zee's Subhash Chandra Will Walk Out With Rs 6.5 Crore Repayment Vs Rs 22,006 Crore Dues?

In a big relief for Zee founder Subhash Chandra, NCLT has approved a repayment plan under which he will pay just Rs 6.5 crore to settle creditor claims of Rs 22,006.5 crore, a haircut of nearly 99.97 per cent which leaves lenders with a recovery of mere 0.03 per cent of their admitted claims.

The ruling came after the two original NCLT members delivered a split verdict, prompting the tribunal's president to bring in NCLT Member (Judicial) Nilesh Sharma as a third member to break the tie. Sharma sided with approval, holding that the plan was required to be cleared under Section 114 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Why NCLT Let It Through

The decision wasn't really NCLT's call alone; it hinged on what the code calls the ‘commercial wisdom’ of financial creditors, 80.81 per cent of whom had already voted in favour of the plan back in November 2024.

Valuations placed before the tribunal showed Chandra's personal estate was worth even less than the ₹6.5 crore on offer, leading Sharma to conclude that pushing him into bankruptcy would leave creditors worse off, not better.

His 144-page order reasoned that resolving Chandra's insolvency now gives creditors a better shot at recovering from the principal debtors directly, rather than chasing a bankrupt guarantor.

The Twist: Nobody Gets To Opt Out

Here's the part that made this ruling bite for dissenting lenders: under Section 115 of the IBC, once a repayment plan is approved, it binds every creditor whether they voted for it or not. The approved plan is binding upon all creditors, assenting or dissenting, NCLT held, rejecting the idea that objectors could sit out and independently pursue their full original debt.

That left dissenting lenders, led by LIC Housing Finance, who were owed roughly Rs 1,322 crore, with no legal room to maneuver. LIC Housing Finance is set to recover just Rs 38.09 lakh, and along with banks like HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, Canara Bank, RBL Bank and Union Bank of India, it had argued the payout was disproportionate and questioned whether related-party votes had unfairly swung the majority. 

NCLT rejected those objections, reiterating that its statutory mandate doesn't allow it to second-guess a plan that clears the creditor vote threshold.

What Happens Next

The matter now returns to NCLT's original two-member division bench, which had delivered the split verdict. Under Section 419(5) of the Companies Act, 2013. Once issued, the resolution professional will update the creditor list and proceed with distributing the ₹6.5 crore as approved, closing this chapter of Chandra's personal insolvency case.