On 6 April, a Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, directed the NCLAT to hear the matter urgently.
The tribunal bench, headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan, said arguments had concluded, and the judgment was reserved.
Senior lawyer Abhijeet Sinha, representing Vedanta, said the case raises broader questions around how IBC should be implemented and to what extent the committee of creditors (CoC) should work under “commercial wisdom”.
On Monday, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CoC before the NCLAT said that a possible information leak may have prompted Vedanta to revise its bid for the bankrupt firm.
Senior Lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi representing the resolution professional on Friday said, “One of the biggest methods of drawing attention to some kind of big sensational issues is to suggest that we (resolution professionals) declared Mr (Abhijeet) Sinha’s client (Vedanta) to be the best, the highest, or the most appropriate and then we suddenly changed it. The very premise of this submission… as if I have declared you as the highest and then shifted it. That would be unfair if it would have happened, and completely without foundational facts.”
Vedanta rejected the allegations as “baseless” and said the company had “not suppressed any documents and presented everything in court”.
JAL entered insolvency proceedings in 2024, with more than ₹50,000 crore owed to creditors.
The contest for JAL’s assets includes nearly 4,000 acres of land across Noida, Greater Noida and the Yamuna Expressway, along with hotels, commercial assets, cement capacity and a Formula 1 racing track.
Adani Enterprises’ resolution plan was approved by the Allahabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 17 March, after which Vedanta approached the NCLAT and the Supreme Court seeking a stay.
