upGrad Files Insolvency Petition Against Bira 91 Over ₹1.02 Crore Dues

Edtech company upGrad has filed an insolvency petition against B9 Beverages Limited, the parent company of beer brand Bira 91, over alleged unpaid dues of ₹1.02 crore. The petition was filed before the New Delhi bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on October 22, 2026, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The education company is seeking initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the brewer to recover the outstanding amount.

The latest legal action adds to the mounting financial pressure on B9 Beverages, which has been struggling with unpaid vendor bills, lender disputes, operational disruptions and efforts to restructure its business. The company is already facing insolvency-related proceedings initiated by other creditors, including glass manufacturer Hindusthan National Glass and Industries Limited (HNGIL), which has sought recovery of more than ₹11 crore. The new petition highlights how creditor claims continue to complicate the brewer’s attempts to revive its operations.

What Is the upGrad Insolvency Petition Against Bira 91?

According to documents reviewed by Moneycontrol, upGrad Education Private Limited filed its petition against B9 Beverages on October 22 before the NCLT’s New Delhi bench.

The petition invokes Section 9 of the IBC, which allows an operational creditor to approach the tribunal for initiation of insolvency proceedings when a company fails to pay an eligible outstanding debt.

UpGrad has named B9 Beverages as the corporate debtor and is seeking the commencement of CIRP over alleged unpaid operational dues of ₹1.02 crore.

However, the petition does not disclose several important details, including:

• The specific services provided by upGrad to B9 Beverages.
• The period during which the alleged dues accumulated.
• The date on which the payment default occurred.

UpGrad has not publicly detailed the commercial relationship behind the claim in the available reports.

It is also important to distinguish between filing an insolvency petition and the admission of an insolvency case. The NCLT must examine the application and determine whether the statutory requirements have been satisfied before admitting it.

What Is Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code?

Section 9 of the IBC provides a legal route for operational creditors to seek insolvency proceedings against companies that fail to clear qualifying payment obligations.

Operational creditors are generally businesses or service providers that are owed money for goods supplied or services rendered. They are different from financial creditors, such as banks and lenders, whose claims arise from financial debt.

Before filing a Section 9 application, an operational creditor must generally serve a statutory demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC.

The corporate debtor is given 10 days to pay the amount or bring a qualifying pre-existing dispute to the creditor’s notice. If the requirements are met and the application is admitted, the insolvency resolution process begins.

During CIRP, an interim resolution professional takes control of the company’s affairs, and creditors participate in the process established under the IBC.

In B9 Beverages’ case, upGrad’s filing is an application seeking the initiation of this process. It does not mean that the brewer has already been admitted into insolvency proceedings through this particular petition.

Bira 91 Already Faces an ₹11.77 Crore Claim From Glassmaker HNGIL

The upGrad petition is not the first major creditor action against B9 Beverages.

Hindusthan National Glass and Industries Limited issued a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC in August 2026, seeking recovery of approximately ₹11.77 crore.

The dispute concerns more than 51 lakh customised amber glass bottles manufactured specifically for B9 Beverages against confirmed purchase orders placed in June and September 2024.

HNGIL alleged that the brewer failed to take delivery of the bottles despite the orders. According to the glassmaker, the customised bottles carry Bira 91 branding and cannot easily be sold to other buyers.

The amount claimed included approximately ₹7.03 crore towards the value of the manufactured bottles, ₹1.12 crore in storage charges and contractual interest, after adjusting a credit balance.

The glassmaker also said that the uncollected bottles were occupying storage space and blocking working capital at its facilities.

This dispute illustrates how B9 Beverages’ operational difficulties have affected businesses across its supply chain. Suppliers that manufactured products against confirmed orders have also faced financial exposure as the brewer struggled to maintain operations.

NCLT Had Earlier Sent Bira 91 and Creditors to Mediation

In September 2026, the NCLT directed B9 Beverages and its creditors to explore a settlement through mediation in connection with multiple insolvency proceedings.

The direction was intended to give the company and its creditors an opportunity to work towards a possible resolution and avoid further escalation of the disputes.

However, the tribunal also restrained B9 Beverages from parting with or transferring its assets while the settlement discussions were underway.

Creditors had raised concerns about the proposed settlement arrangements and the possibility of assets being transferred before their claims were resolved.

The tribunal directed the parties involved in the mediation process to discuss the outstanding liabilities and the proposed revival plan.

The upGrad petition adds another creditor claim to this already complicated situation. Whether it will be addressed through the existing settlement discussions or proceed independently will depend on the legal process and the positions taken by the parties.