Adani Enterprises has told the NCLAT that the Jaiprakash Associates resolution followed due process, with evaluation metrics disclosed upfront and accepted by bidders. It opposed Vedanta’s late addendum, warning it could undermine process integrity. Adani also argued lender decisions represent commercial wisdom beyond judicial review, as the dispute remains pending before the tribunal.
Lenders defending the Jaiprakash Associates bid process before the NCLAT say selecting Adani Enterprises was fair and transparent. They rejected Vedanta’s late addendum offering more money, arguing it violated the pre-set bidding framework and would have prolonged delays. The hearing centers on claims that the process was tailored versus competitively handled under the original timelines and terms.
Your news, in seconds
Get the Beige app — every story in 60 words, updated hourly. Free on iOS & Android.
The Supreme Court has asked the NCLAT to quickly decide on merging debt-ridden Supertech’s remaining 14 housing projects. The plan is to move stalled construction toward completion while addressing homebuyers’ long-running grievances. NCLAT will hear all stakeholders, including land agencies and farmers, following an earlier order for NBCC to finish 16 other Supertech projects.
The NCLAT has reserved its judgment in the Jaypee insolvency case after arguments from both sides. Vedanta alleged the resolution process was not transparent and the evaluation was unfair. The Resolution Professional countered that the process followed approved frameworks. Adani, declared winners, said competitive bidding enhanced value—while the tribunal waits to decide.
The NCLAT has adjourned the hearing on Vedanta Ltd’s petitions challenging Adani Enterprises’ ₹14,535-crore bid for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. The tribunal cited a change in the bench, pushing the decision timeline further. Vedanta’s move contests the selection process as stakeholders await a fresh hearing date and next steps in the corporate battle.
In the insolvency case of Jaiprakash Associates, the resolution professional told the NCLAT that Vedanta was never formally declared the highest bidder. The only evidence cited was an email showing the highest financial value discovered, not an official bid award. Vedanta’s petition is being argued as lacking legal and factual backing.
Never miss a story
Set alerts for the topics and sources you care about. Download Beige for free.
Lavasa homebuyers have filed a fresh appeal at NCLAT challenging a resolution plan cleared by creditors. They allege discriminatory treatment, serious flaws in how the plan was approved, and a lack of transparency in the insolvency process. Homebuyers are seeking tribunal intervention to ensure fair treatment and address the alleged injustices.
Swipe through stories, personalise your feed, and save articles for later — all on the app.