Kerala HC orders personal appearance of BYJU’S RP, GLAS representative and EY India Chief in alleged contempt case
The order was issued by Justice K. Natarajan on November 27, 2025.
The case is filed by the Supreme Court dated May 21, 2025 and BYJU’s Epic! Creations Inc. and Tangible Play Inc. (Osmo).
The petitioners allege that despite this protection, parallel bankruptcy proceedings and asset enforcement measures were initiated in the United States using the same Term Loan B (TLB) debt that GLAS relied on in India, thereby violating the court order.
A detailed counter-affidavit filed in the contempt case on behalf of BYJU co-founder Riju Ravindran puts before the Court extensive material alleging what it calls the “fraudulent double-rescue architecture”. BYJU’s international subsidiaries include Tangible Play, Great Learning, Byju’s Alpha Inc., Epic! and Tynker were acquired for a total of approximately US$1.42 billion and formed the backbone of the company’s global business.
Despite their central importance, these foreign subsidiaries were allegedly excluded from the Resolution Professional G Form (Expression of Interest) dated 25 August 2025 and 24 September 2025.
This deficiency, according to the affidavit, suppressed the value in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by creating a misleading and artificially diminished picture of BYJU’s asset position. At the same time, the affidavit alleges that GLAS initiated enforcement proceedings against these subsidiaries under Term Loan B (TLB) in the United States and maintained its full claim of ₹ 11,432.98 crore, which was admitted in India, thereby enabling an illegal double bailout.
The materials submitted to the Kerala High Court also raise serious conflict of interest concerns regarding EY and the conduct of the insolvency process. According to the petitioners, communications in the affidavit show that EY’s restructuring team was closely involved from the inception of the CIRP – advising on GLAS’s claims, managing key communication channels such as the ip.byjus@outlook.com email used to collect and verify creditor claims and review those claims. The affidavit alleges that EY failed to disclose its previous work for both BYJU’S and GLAS in the conflict of interest disclosures required by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI). The draft emails prepared by EY state that all conflicts are marked “NONE” despite previous discussions with the parties. The appointment of current Resolution Specialist Shailendra Ajmera, whose address is listed as Ernst & Young LLP’s Worldmark Aerocity office, is also being questioned as evidence that EY continues to exercise de facto control over CIRP even after the initial Interim Resolution Professional was replaced.
The counter-affidavit also seeks a set of directions from the Kerala High Court. It demands that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) be tasked with investigating alleged fraud, collusion, cross-border diminution and concealment of foreign enforcement actions. He also wants BYJU’s foreign subsidiaries to be protected until these issues are resolved. Finally, it requests that the ₹158 crore personally contributed by Riju Ravindran towards a proposed settlement be placed in a court-monitored escrow account with a mechanism for repayment in case the Committee of Creditors (CoC) or the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) fail to act on the compromise offer.
There has been no comment on the order from EY India or GLAS Trust so far.
