Supreme Court Considers Vedanta's Challenge to Jaypee Resolution

Vedanta Moves Supreme Court Against Adani’s ₹14,535 Crore JAL Acquisition, Claims Higher Bid Rejected​

New Delhi, March 31: Vedanta Ltd has approached the Supreme Court challenging the lenders’ decision to approve Adani Group’s resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL), stating that its own revised offer was superior but was rejected.

Vedanta Claims Higher Value Bid Was Overlooked​

In its petition, Vedanta argued that its revised proposal was significantly higher than Adani Group’s offer. The company stated that its bid was about ₹3,400 crore higher in gross value and nearly ₹500 crore more in net present value.

Vedanta highlighted that in its final resolution plan submitted on October 14, 2025, it had offered ₹3,770 crore upfront and ₹3,100 crore payable after 365 days from the effective date to secured financial creditors. Additionally, it proposed an equity infusion of ₹400 crore into JAL.

The company later revised its proposal on November 8, 2025, increasing the upfront cash component to ₹6,563 crore and equity infusion to ₹800 crore, while maintaining the overall bid value at ₹12,505.85 crore.

Why Lenders Preferred Adani’s Offer​

The Committee of Creditors (CoC) approved Adani Enterprises Ltd’s bid primarily due to its payment structure. Adani’s plan included an upfront cash payment of around ₹6,000 crore and a faster payout schedule, with the remaining amount to be settled within two years.

In contrast, Vedanta’s proposal involved a longer payment timeline extending up to five years, which influenced the lenders’ decision.

Legal Challenge and Allegations by Vedanta​

Vedanta has alleged that the lenders acted arbitrarily in rejecting its bid and questioned the conduct of the resolution professional during the insolvency process.

The company also argued that the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) failed to recognise that the commercial wisdom of lenders is not absolute and can be challenged in cases involving arbitrariness or capricious decision-making.

Vedanta further contended that the NCLT incorrectly treated the ₹500 crore net present value difference as marginal and allowed the ₹3,400 crore gross value gap to be overridden by subjective parameters.

Concerns Over Transparency and Process​

The petition raised concerns about lack of transparency in the bid evaluation process. Vedanta stated that the Evaluation Matrix, Request for Resolution Plan (RFRP), and Process Note should be aligned with the objective of value maximisation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

It also alleged that key evaluation criteria were not disclosed, which, according to the company, compromised the fairness of the process.

Vedanta further claimed that the Committee of Creditors failed to provide adequate reasoning for its decision and relied heavily on an external consultant, effectively delegating its decision-making responsibility.

Appeal Against NCLT and NCLAT Decisions​

Jaiprakash Associates Ltd entered insolvency proceedings in June 2024. In November, the CoC approved Adani Enterprises’ ₹14,535 crore resolution plan for the company.

Earlier this month, the NCLT approved the plan. Vedanta then approached the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which declined to stay its implementation, prompting the company to move the Supreme Court.

Vedanta has requested an interim stay on the operation and implementation of the NCLAT order.

Warning of Irreversible Consequences​

Vedanta cautioned that allowing the implementation of Adani’s resolution plan during the pendency of its appeal would lead to irreversible consequences. These include transfer of management control, acquisition of shares, handover of assets, and operational takeover of JAL.

The company also warned that such steps would create third-party rights, including payments to creditors, making it difficult to reverse the process later.

According to Vedanta, once these actions are completed, its appeal would become ineffective and reduced to a purely academic exercise.

Dispute Over Role of Resolution Professional​

Vedanta also raised objections regarding the role of the resolution professional, alleging that the individual exceeded a neutral position by offering opinions on the addendum and labeling it as inconsistent with the process note without allowing independent evaluation by the CoC.

The matter is now before the Supreme Court, where Vedanta is seeking relief against the ongoing implementation of Adani Group’s approved resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd.