Byju’s is understood to have approached the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) challenging the recent order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) that admitted BCCI’s plea to initiate insolvency proceedings against the edtech firm.

Sources privy to the development said the company is seeking an urgent hearing on the matter.

Byju’s did not comment on the issue.

According to sources, Byju’s on Thursday moved the appellate tribunal, NCLAT, contesting the recent order of NCLT’s Bengaluru bench that had admitted the cricket board’s plea to start insolvency proceedings against the parent company Think and Learn, after the edtech firm failed to pay ₹158.9 crore dues.

The Bengaluru bench of the tribunal also dismissed Byju’s plea to refer the dispute to arbitration saying that it was not maintainable.

The NCLT has appointed Pankaj Srivastava as the interim resolution professional.

Earlier this week, Byju’s had said it is hopeful of reaching “an amicable settlement” with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

Byju’s was once valued at $22 billion but the reopening of schools after the easing of pandemic restrictions led to its unravelling. BlackRock recently slashed its valuation of $1 billion.

The company’s troubles began when it missed financial reporting deadlines two years ago and fell short of revenue projections by more than 50 per cent.

In February, a group of investors in Byju’s parent company Think & Lean (T&L), including Prosus and Peak XV, voted to remove Raveendran as CEO during an extraordinary general meeting (EGM), citing allegations of “mismanagement and failures”. Raveendran has denied allegations and disputed the vote’s validity.

At the heart of the dispute is the ‘Team Sponsor Agreement’ that BCCI and Byju’s entered into on July 25, 2019.

After March 31, 2022, Byju’s made payment in full only against one invoice for India-South Africa cricket series held in June 2022 amounting to ₹25.35 crore but failed to pay for subsequent invoices.

“Corporate Debtor had never disputed the fact that it was required to pay the agreed Fee as per the arrangement between the parties.

“However, despite having acknowledged the dues, the Corporate Debtor has failed to pay and instead, the Corporate Debtor repeatedly kept requesting the Operational Creditor for extension of time for payment,” the NCLT said.