NCLAT orders MSCI not to delist Polycab pending its ruling — a ₹2.79 crore dispute now touches the index
The tribunal reserved the CIRP appeal on Oct 15; on Oct 27 it directed MSCI to take no delisting action until it pronounces its order. The stock closed +1.1% at ₹7,800.
₹7,800 Oct 28, +1.1% on the day
LARGE-CAP by market cap ≈ ₹1,17,495 Cr
₹2.79 Cr
alleged operational debt, Asier Metals
−23.0% adjusted high ₹10,126 (Jun 22)
₹9,899 Cr
consolidated, +52.8% YoY
₹990 Cr
OPM 14.4%
Three weeks from a ₹2.79 crore admission order to an index-level direction
On October 27, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, directed MSCI not to delist Polycab's scrip from the MSCI Index until it pronounces its order in the company's insolvency appeal. The direction came on a mentioning: the appeal had been reserved for orders since October 15, and counsel for the appellant submitted that if the order were not pronounced that day, the MSCI Index "may de-list the Polycab stock in its next review cycle, which cycle starts on 28.10.2026". The order was intimated to MSCI the same day, and Polycab filed it with the exchanges on October 28 at 10:21 IST. The stock closed the session at ₹7,800, up 1.1%.
NCLT Ahmedabad admits a ₹2.79 crore CIRP petition against Polycab
The NCLT, Ahmedabad Bench, admitted a petition filed by Asier Metals Private Limited under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Polycab, in respect of an alleged operational debt of ₹2.79 crore. The company said it was of the opinion, in consultation with its legal advisors, that it has a strong case with good grounds of appeal — including that of it being a commercial dispute — and that it was in the process of filing the appeal. A later disclosure to NSE records that the petition was filed on August 24, 2026.
Read:The admission put a formal insolvency process over a company whose market capitalisation, at the last close, works out to roughly ₹1.17 lakh crore — a mismatch of scale between the alleged debt and the consequence that runs through everything that followed.
NCLT order intimation, Oct 7, 2026NCLAT stays the CIRP admission order
Two days after admission, the NCLAT stayed and kept in abeyance the NCLT's October 7 order admitting the CIRP petition. Polycab had filed its appeal on October 8 and the matter was heard on October 9, the date it was listed for.
Read:The stay suspended the insolvency process while the appeal is decided. It is interim relief, not a resolution — the admission order itself still awaits the tribunal's final word.
NCLAT stay order intimation, Oct 9, 2026NCLAT directs MSCI to take no delisting action till it pronounces
With the appeal reserved for orders since October 15, the matter was mentioned before the bench. The order records the submission that the MSCI Index may delist the stock in its next review cycle starting October 28, and directs that "no action as aforesaid be taken by MSCI till we pronounce the order". The cause title names Bharat Ajay Jaisinghani, described as suspended director of Polycab India Limited, as the appellant.
Read:The direction extends the tribunal's protection from the insolvency process itself to its knock-on effect on index membership — but only until the reserved order is pronounced. It postpones the index question; it does not answer it.
NCLAT order of Oct 27, 2026, filed with BSE Oct 28The filings do not spell out why an MSCI deletion would matter; the general mechanism — funds that track an index sell what leaves it — is inference, not something the record states. What the record does state is that the company's side treated the October 28 review cycle as urgent enough to seek a direction on a day the tribunal had not planned to pronounce. One detail of the record worth noting: the company's October 8 intimation describes the appeal as filed by the Company, while the October 27 order's cause title lists the suspended director as the appellant. The report takes both descriptions as the filings give them.
From admission to index direction in twenty days
NCLT Ahmedabad admits Asier Metals' Section 9 petition for CIRP against Polycab over an alleged operational debt of ₹2.79 crore. The company says it has strong grounds of appeal, including that the matter is a commercial dispute.
Polycab files its appeal before the NCLAT; the matter is listed for hearing on October 9. The company also submits details sought by NSE, recording that the petition was filed on August 24, 2026.
NCLAT stays and keeps in abeyance the NCLT's admission order.
NCLAT grants an early-listing request; the hearing, earlier listed for October 26, moves up to October 15.
NCLAT hears the appeal and reserves it for orders. The same day, the board approves Q2 FY27 results.
On a mentioning, NCLAT directs MSCI to take no delisting action till it pronounces the reserved order; the order is intimated to MSCI the same day.
The sequence shows a company moving at maximum procedural speed — appeal filed within a day of the admission order, a stay within two, an early-listing request that pulled the hearing forward by eleven days, and a mentioning to protect the index position when the reserved order did not arrive before the review cycle. Each step bought time; none of them has yet produced the ruling that settles whether the admission stands.
How the stock traded through it
The insolvency matter landed on a stock already in decline. From the August 31 close of ₹9,445 to the October 23 close of ₹7,440 — the lowest in the window — the fall is 21.2%, and the steepest single day in it, −5.8% on September 1, predates the CIRP news entirely; no filing in the record coincides with it. From the ₹8,310 close on October 7 — the last session before the admission order reached the exchange — to October 28, the stock is down 6.1%, a stretch that also contains the Q2 results on October 15, which the market took down 1.5% on the day despite the headline numbers. At ₹7,800 the stock sits 23.0% below its adjusted 52-week high of ₹10,126 (June 22) and 17.1% above its 52-week low of ₹6,663 (January 27). Attributing the October slide to any single cause would overreach; the filings only anchor the four marked sessions.
A record quarter sits beneath the courtroom story
Consolidated figures from exchange filings. Q2 FY27 revenue +52.8% and net profit +42.9% over Q2 FY26.
The company the tribunal is weighing is, by its own October 15 press release, at its operating peak: "Highest Ever Second Quarter & Half Year Revenue, EBITDA & Profitability". The release puts H1 FY27 revenue at ₹1,81,086 million — ₹18,108.6 crore — up 46% year on year, and Q2 EBITDA at ₹14,225 million, i.e. ₹1,422.5 crore, up 39%. Consolidated Q2 revenue of ₹9,898.9 crore and net profit of ₹990.0 crore are both the highest in the five quarters above. That is the context for the ₹2.79 crore figure at the centre of the dispute: the alleged operational debt amounts to less than a third of one percent of a single quarter's net profit. The filings characterise the underlying matter, in the company's words, as a commercial dispute; the tribunal has not yet ruled on that characterisation.
The order everything now waits on
NCLAT pronouncement
The reserved order decides whether the CIRP admission stands. The MSCI direction, by its own terms, holds only "till we pronounce the order" — the protection and the uncertainty expire together.
MSCI review cycle
The cycle the order refers to started October 28. Whether the scrip is retained once the tribunal rules is the open question the October 27 direction deferred, not answered.
Further CIRP intimations
Polycab has made eight filings on this matter between October 7 and October 28 and has committed to notify the exchanges of material events as they occur; the next filing likely carries the pronouncement itself.
What began as a ₹2.79 crore petition produced, within twenty days of its admission, a stay, a reserved appeal and a direction to a global index provider. Each step of that chain is documented in the company's own filings; what none of them contains is the outcome. Until the NCLAT pronounces, the stay keeps the insolvency process in abeyance and the October 27 direction keeps the scrip in the MSCI Index — both as interim arrangements.
The data suggests the market has treated the matter as a contained procedural risk rather than a solvency question — the four marked filing sessions net to less than one percent against a quarter of record revenue and profit. Key monitorables are the pronouncement of the reserved order and the company's subsequent intimation on the index review. Investors may consider that the risk here is binary and procedural: it resolves on a date the tribunal has not announced.
Informational and educational content only. Not investment advice.