Aban Offshore Limited has issued a formal response to BSE Limited addressing queries about the timing of regulatory disclosures related to its ongoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The company's clarification comes in response to BSE's inquiry about potential delays in disclosure under Regulation 30.

Company's Response to BSE Query

The company explained that the delay in disclosure was due to the availability of the relevant NCLAT order rather than any procedural oversight. According to the response, the Hon'ble NCLAT order dated March 27, 2026 was only uploaded to the NCLAT website on April 06, 2026.

Resolution Professional's Statement

Shailesh Desai, serving as the Resolution Professional for Aban Offshore Limited, emphasized that the disclosure was made to stock exchanges immediately upon the order becoming available. Desai holds IBBI Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00183/2017-18/10362 and digitally signed the response on April 07, 2026.

The company maintained its position that no delay occurred in the submission process, stating that the disclosure timeline was directly linked to when the NCLAT order became accessible through official channels. The response was submitted through BSE's Listing Centre, addressing the exchange's concerns about compliance with regulatory disclosure requirements.

Current Corporate Status

Aban Offshore Limited continues to operate under the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, with all communications being handled by the appointed Resolution Professional. The company's response demonstrates ongoing compliance efforts with stock exchange regulations despite the complex operational circumstances of the insolvency proceedings.

Aban Offshore Limited, currently undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), has received a significant order from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai dated March 27, 2026. The order pertains to Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.477/2025 filed by Reji Abraham, the suspended Managing Director of the company, against Punjab National Bank and others.

Settlement Proposals Rejected

The tribunal noted that during previous proceedings held on September 26, 2025, and January 21, 2026, there was an expectation that One Time Settlement (OTS) proposals offered by the appellant could resolve the controversy. However, the respondent bank has formally rejected these settlement proposals through correspondence dated January 22, 2026.

Resolution Professional Changes

A significant development highlighted in the order involves changes in the Resolution Professional appointment. The tribunal acknowledged that the previously appointed Interim Resolution Professional had passed away, necessitating a substitution. Mr. Shailesh Desai has been subsequently appointed as the new Resolution Professional in December 2025.

The appellant has been directed to carry out necessary amendments to include Mr. Shailesh Desai as a party in the company appeal. The tribunal has also mandated that the appellant serve Mr. Shailesh Desai through dasti service and file an Affidavit of Service within the following week.

Auction Notice and Next Steps

During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel submitted a memorandum that included an auction notice dated December 22, 2025, issued by the newly appointed Resolution Professional Mr. Shailesh Desai. This development indicates the progression of the insolvency resolution process under the new Resolution Professional's guidance.

Tribunal Composition and Next Hearing

The order was passed by Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member Technical) of the NCLAT Chennai. The tribunal has scheduled the next hearing for the company appeal on April 10, 2026, for further orders.

This development represents a continuation of the legal proceedings surrounding Aban Offshore Limited's insolvency resolution process, with the company having entered CIRP following an NCLT order dated September 01, 2025. The rejection of settlement proposals means the appeal will now proceed on its merits, potentially affecting the timeline and outcome of the resolution process.