Supreme Court Refuses To Stay Adani's Resolution Plan for Jaiprakash Associates

The Supreme Court today refused to interfere with the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which had not agreed to accept the plea of Vedanta Ltd to stay the implementation of Adani Enterprises' resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd.

A CJI Surya Kant led bench noted that the NCLAT had posted Vedanta's appeal for hearing on April 10, 2026. The bench also comprising Justice Bagchi has asked NCLAT to hear Vedanta's appeal out of turn on April 10 itself or on the next immediate working day if arguments do not conclude.

The Supreme Court has further directed that before taking any major policy decision, the Monitoring Committee shall take the leave from the NCLAT.

Vedanta approached Supreme Court against the NCLAT's decision to decline to grant an interim stay on the operation and implementation of two orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad Bench and specifically permitting the implementation of the resolution plan in respect of Jaiprakash Associates Limited during the pendency of the appeals.

It was Vedanta's case that after emerging as the highest bidder in the multi-round auction/challenge process conducted by the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) of Jaiprakash and despite the being acknowledged by the resolution professional as the highest Bidder and offering a significantly superior financial proposal, the CoC rejected its resolution plan without any reason and proceeded to approve a resolution plan which was lower by approximately INR 3,400 Crores in gross value and approximately INR 500 Crores in NPV.

"The NCLAT erred in permitting the implementation of the approved resolution plan during the pendency of the appeals despite (i) the existence of a strong prima facie challenge to the rejection of a resolution plan that is significantly higher in value; and (ii) the imminent risk that implementation would render the appeals infructuous", the supreme court was told.

Supreme Court was further told that the Impugned Order, by permitting irreversible steps to be taken in furtherance of a demonstrably flawed process and a significantly lower-in-value resolution plan, undermines the core objective of value maximisation as well as the effective adjudication of Vedanta’s appeal.

Appearing for Vedanta, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal said the company’s bid was for Rs 17,926 crore while that of Adani was for Rs 14,535 crore. He said what is happening is that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) is willing to give it for Rs 3,000 crore less

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CoC, said, “For us, practically the difference is Rs 500 crore.”

The CoC of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. was represented by Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld. SG and Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Biswajeet Dubey, Adv.

Adani Enterprises was represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Senior Advocate Ritin Rai with a team from Karanjawala & Co: Sandeep Singhi, Ruby S Ahuja, Seema Sundd, Abhishek Swaroop, Rituraj Srivastava, Ravneet Kaur Malik, and Shruti Pandey.

Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. and Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Adv. appeared for the Resolution Professional and Vedanta Ltd. was represented by Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Deep Roy, Adv.

Case Title: Vedanta Limited vs. Mr. Bhuvan Madan, Resolution Professional of Jaiprakash Associates Limited & Ors.

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi

Hearing Date: April 6, 2026