&w=3840&q=100)
Glas Trust calls Byju's defamation threat a bid to divert from court orders
The legal counsel of Byju's founders, J Michael McNutt, rejected the allegations levelled by Glas Trust, calling it "incomplete and misleading".
The counsel of Byju's founders, Byju Raveendran and Divya Gokulnath, on Thursday said they are gearing up to file an over USD 2.5 billion suit against Glas Trust and others for damage to their reputation and business.
"Byju Raveendran's latest act of threatening defamation claims against GLAS Trust and the Term Loan B Lenders is a transparent attempt to distract from the facts, coming on the heels of a US federal court holding him in contempt. The fact of the matter is that every court to consider the issues has ruled against Raveendran and his cohorts," Glas Trust said.
Glas Trust Company LLC is the trustee for lenders to whom Byju's owes USD 1.2 billion. Byju's founders have, however, contested Glas Trust claims.
Glas Trust now controls Byju's Alpha, which was a special-purpose financing vehicle established by the edtech firm to receive Term Loan B funds.
Byju's Alpha has filed a lawsuit against Byju Raveendran, his co-founder and wife Divya Gokulnath, and his consigliere Anita Kishore, alleging that each of them co-orchestrated and executed a lawless scheme to conceal and steal USD 533 million of loan proceeds.
Glas Trust said judgments exceeding USD 533 million have been entered against Raveendran's allies, "including for their fraudulent conduct".
"Raveendran's brother was found by a Delaware federal court to be untruthful and one of the most incompetent directors in Delaware's history. A Delaware federal court stated its intention to make a criminal referral when Raveendran attempted to bribe a witness and had held Raveendran in contempt," Glas Trust alleged.
The US lenders' agent said that it has at all times acted within its rights.
"Mr Raveendran's threats are desperate and meritless, and the irony of Mr Raveendran threatening to sue for defamation when he continues to unlawfully conceal what happened to the missing USD 533 million should be lost on no one," Glas Trust said.
McNutt alleged that GLAS Trust continues to distract from the true situation in India.
"It is incorrect to claim that US Courts have ruled against Raveendran and his 'co-horts' on the relevant issues. The proceedings in Delaware against Byju have only just commenced, and Byju has not even submitted his response to the complaint," the counsel said.
McNutt said Byju Raveendran has not been found guilty of any wrongdoing by any court, in any jurisdiction, and the contempt order against Byju is being contested.
He said that the term 'co-horts" is misleading and offensive.
McNutt alleged that the order against Think & Learn, its subsidiary and Byju Raveendran's brother (a director of Think & learn who is suspended due to bankruptcy in India) was without any legal representation.
Glas Trust initiated legal proceedings against Byju's and its founders in US courts.
The agent of US-based lenders also approached the Supreme Court of India to challenge the dismissal of the insolvency case against Byju's by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in an appeal filed by BCCI.
The apex court ruled in favour of Glas Trust, and the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) litigation against Byju's is going on.
Byju's founders are contesting the case and filed a plea to remove the Interim Resolution Professional, alleging his link with Glas Trust through the consultancy firm EY.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
NIA court frames charges against JeI operatives, trust in fund-raising case
Special judge NIA, J&K, Sandeep Gandotra, framed charges against three individuals and an educational trust for allegedly raising and utilising funds to further the activities of the proscribed organisation Jamaat-e-Islami, Jammu and Kashmir (JeI, J&K), in violation of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967. The charges were framed in case RC-07/2022/NIA/JMU, after the NIA found prima facie material under sections 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 10, 13, 20, 22-C, 38, and 39 of the UAPA. (File) The accused include Amir Mohammad Shamsi, of Rehtal village, Rajouri; Abdul Hamid Ganai, alias Abdul Hamid Fayaz, of Nadigam, Shopian; and Mushtaq Ahmad Mir, alias Mushtaq Ahmad Zargar of Thanamang, Darhal, Rajouri, presently residing in Pakistan. The fourth accused is Al-Huda Educational Trust, a Rajouri-based organisation allegedly used as a financial front for JeI. The charges were framed in case RC-07/2022/NIA/JMU, after the NIA found prima facie material under sections 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 10, 13, 20, 22-C, 38, and 39 of the UAPA. As per the NIA, Amir Mohammad Shamsi, who previously served as Amir-e-Jila of JeI in Rajouri, conspired with Abdul Hamid Ganai, then Amir-e-Jamaat of JeI, J&K, to collect funds through Al-Huda Educational Trust even after JeI was declared an unlawful association in February 2019. Witness statements and financial documents revealed that Shamsi received ₹1.80 lakh from Mushtaq Ahmad Mir, a Pakistan-based terrorist affiliated with Hizbul Mujahideen (HM), and disbursed ₹1 lakh to Ganai for furtherance of separatist activities. The court noted that while disclosure statements recorded before executive magistrates were inadmissible, independent evidence—including statements of trustees and local donors under Section 164 CrPC—substantiated the prosecution's case. Advocates Syed Aqib and Adil Pandit strongly opposed the charges, arguing that no substantive material had been recovered and that confessions lacked evidentiary value under the Indian Evidence Act. However, the court held that the cumulative evidence, including Trust deeds, financial transfers, and corroborative witness testimonies, justified the framing of charges. Proceedings under Section 512 CrPC have been initiated against Mushtaq Ahmad Mir, who is absconding and believed to be operating from Pakistan.
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Singer's aide lured via phone call from UK: Gurugram police
Rohit Shokeen, a close aide and alleged financier of Haryanvi singer Rahul Yadav, alias Fazilpuria, was lured to his death in Gurugram's Sector 77 late Monday night through a WhatsApp call from a UK-based number, police said on Wednesday. The car the victim was commuting in. (HT Photo) Shokeen, 40, a resident of Kamaruddin Nagar in Delhi, was allegedly called to the location to resolve a financial dispute involving ₹60 lakh that he had lent to Deepak Nandal, police said. While he was waiting outside his car near Palm Hills society, two assailants in delivery executive uniforms shot him dead. Police said more than 15 bullets were pumped into his head, chest, neck, and abdomen, even after he collapsed, indicating a deliberate attempt to instil fear among his associates, including Fazilpuria. 'The caller was also suspected to be Nandal, a close associate of gangster Sunil Sardhaniya,' a senior police officer said, adding both the gangsters hail from Rohtak and are believed to be hiding abroad. A social media post in Sardhaniya's name has since claimed responsibility for the killing and issued threats to Fazilpuria if he fails to return owed money. 'Prima facie, the call originated from a UK number. It is being verified whether it was a virtual number,' said a senior police officer. Shokeen had three criminal cases against him in Delhi, including land grabbing and assault. As of now, police believe the number used to call Shokeen genuinely belonged to Nandal. However, they are still verifying whether it was spoofed or generated through a virtual platform to mask the caller's true identity. Police said Shokeen and Nandal's relationship soured after the latter failed to return the ₹60 lakh borrowed a few years ago. Shokeen's father had submitted a complaint last year alleging life threats from Nandal. Investigators believe the motive was twofold — to avoid repayment and to intimidate Fazilpuria. Shokeen had helped the singer secure a ₹5 crore loan from Sardhaniya through Nandal, which the gang now reportedly wants repaid. On July 14, gunmen hired by Sardhaniya had opened fire on Fazilpuria in Sector 71, from which he survived. Sardhaniya claimed responsibility online. ACP (Manesar) Virender Saini said multiple teams are raiding locations, including outside Haryana. 'The murder site was dark and lacked CCTV coverage. We are scanning other footage for clues,' he said. Despite multiple attempts from HT, Rahul Yadav remains completely unreachable for a statement. He has yet to issue any public statement regarding the recent developments. The singer has been under police protection since July 14, when he survived an attack—security that was deployed within hours of the incident.
Hindustan Times
35 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Ludhiana: NRI woman alleges theft of gold, ₹30K by domestic help
A non-resident Indian (NRI) woman residing temporarily at her Rajguru Nagar Extension home has lodged a police complaint against her domestic help, accusing her of stealing a purse containing gold jewellery, cash, and her passport—just days before her scheduled flight to Dubai on August 8. Acting on the complaint filed by Veena, the Sarabha Nagar police have registered an FIR against Sangeeta, under Section 305 (theft) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). (HT photo for representation) According to ASI Harbhol Singh, the investigating officer, the complainant Veena Kaushal, 69, lives in Dubai with her husband and children. Her Ludhiana residence is occasionally visited by the family, while two tenants currently occupy the property. In her complaint, Veena said that she arrived in Ludhiana a few days ago and was preparing to return to Dubai on August 8. On July 31, she reportedly retrieved her passport, some gold, ₹30,000 in cash, and a few US dollars from a bank locker and placed them in a purse, which she kept near her bed. The purse was later found missing. Veena alleged that her domestic help, Sangeeta, is responsible for the theft. However, Sangeeta has not absconded and remains present at the residence. Police have questioned her and conducted a search of her living quarters but have not recovered the missing items. Acting on the complaint filed by Veena, the Sarabha Nagar police have registered an FIR against Sangeeta, under Section 305 (theft) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 'We have registered a case based on the complaint. While the domestic help is being interrogated, other angles are also being explored,' said ASI Harbhol Singh, adding that one of the two tenants had left the premises on July 26, while the other tenant, who stayed behind, is also under police scrutiny.
