Take 22000 crores and pay only 6 crores as settlement.Can someone explain subhash chandra case zee

Are related parties allowed to vote

80.81% = creditors voting FOR the plan.

<20% = creditors voting AGAINST it.

And a large chunk of the 80.81% came from the disputed entities,

The opposing creditors argued that five entities — Veena Investments, Direct Media Distribution Ventures, World Crest Advisors, Lemonade Capital Advisors and Corpcall Capital Advisors — were associates/related parties of Subhash Chandra and therefore their votes should not have counted. Those five entities together were alleged to account for about 61.78% of the voting share. �

newindianexpress.com

Some of the creditors reported in the case include:

LIC Housing Finance — admitted claim of about ₹1,322 crore; its proposed recovery was only around ₹38 lakh. �

ndtv.com

HDFC Bank — its admitted claim represented about 3.2% of the total claims. HDFC opposed the plan and is considering an NCLAT appeal. �

ndtvprofit.com

Axis Bank

Canara Bank

RBL Bank

Union Bank of India

IDBI Trusteeship, including claims connected with the Franklin Templeton fund

Sammaan Capital (formerly Indiabulls Housing Finance), which originally initiated the insolvency proceedings over a ₹170-crore loan to Vivek Infracon that Chandra had personally guaranteed. �

ndtvprofit.com +1

These are not my views.These are views generated by chatg.They might be wrong.The viewer is advised to apply his own discretion and not to believe what is written here.