The banks’ objections centre on Chandra’s financial position and the way it was assessed. The higher net worth figure relates to the time he provided guarantees, while the ₹32 crore figure is for 2025. The supplied report does not explain how either valuation was calculated.

According to the dissenting banks, requests for a forensic audit and asset tracing remain unresolved. They want these exercises to examine Chandra’s finances and investigate the sharp reduction in his net worth. The report does not establish what caused the decline or whether assets were transferred.

The lenders have also raised concerns about related-party entities crowding them out in the creditors’ committee. This is a separate concern from the net worth calculation: it relates to lender participation in the process. The supplied information does not identify the objecting banks or the related-party entities.

The objections therefore concern both financial scrutiny and the resolution professional’s role. No response from Chandra or the resolution professional is included in the supplied material, and it does not state whether the requested investigations have been ordered.