Adani – Vedanta Dispute Over JAL Heads to NCLAT as Supreme Court Declines to Intervene; Hearing Set for April 10

The court did add one condition to its order. The monitoring committee of JAL cannot take any major policy decisions without getting prior approval from the NCLAT. This means the company's day to day functioning continues, but significant decisions will need clearance from the tribunal until the matter is resolved.

Both Vedanta Limited and Adani Enterprises Limited have been asked to place their arguments and counterclaims before the NCLAT. The court also asked the tribunal to deal with the matter without unnecessary delay.

Background of the Dispute

JAL has been going through an insolvency process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Several companies submitted resolution plans for the acquisition, including Vedanta and Adani Enterprises. In November 2025, the lenders, who collectively form the Committee of Creditors, chose Adani Enterprises' resolution plan. The National Company Law Tribunal subsequently approved the Adani Group's bid.

Vedanta, which had also submitted a bid for JAL, did not accept this outcome and challenged the NCLT's decision before the NCLAT. It filed two separate appeals. One questions whether the resolution plan itself is valid. The other challenges the decision made by both the Committee of Creditors and the NCLT in approving it.

On March 24, 2026, the NCLAT declined to put any interim stay on Adani's resolution plan. It asked JAL's Committee of Creditors to file a response within a week and scheduled the next hearing for April 10.

Vedanta then moved to the Supreme Court on March 25, asking for a stay on the NCLAT's order. The Supreme Court has now turned down that request and sent the matter back to the NCLAT for final hearings.

Why Creditors Chose Adani Over Vedanta

The lenders have stood by their decision to go with Adani's resolution plan. Their position is that the insolvency process was followed correctly under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and that choosing a resolution plan does not come down to who offers the highest amount. Upfront cash, how realistic the execution plan is, and how quickly the payments will be made are all part of the assessment.

On those parameters, the Committee of Creditors found Adani's offer more workable. Adani proposed around ₹6,000 crore upfront with full repayment within two years. Vedanta's plan involved payments spread over up to five years, which the creditors considered less favourable given the timeline.

Vedanta did come back with a revised offer, but it came in after the bidding window had closed. The creditors did not take it up. Accepting a late submission would have required the entire resolution process to be restarted, which was not something the creditors were willing to do at that stage.

Implications for the Resolution Process

With the Supreme Court choosing not to intervene, Adani's resolution plan for JAL remains in place for now. The acquisition process continues while Vedanta's legal challenge is heard at the tribunal level.

The NCLAT hearing on April 10 is the next step. Both sides will present their full arguments before the tribunal. What comes out of those hearings will decide whether Adani's ₹14,535 crore plan for JAL moves ahead without further obstacles or runs into additional legal challenges.

References:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/company/corporate-trends/vedanta-moves-supreme-court-seeking-stay-on-adanis-takeover-of-jaiprakash-associates/articleshow/129892610.cms?from=mdr

https://www.telegraphindia.com/business/supreme-court-declines-to-halt-adanis-jaiprakash-associates-limited-bid-asks-national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-for-speedy-verdict/cid/2154840#goog_rewarded

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/supreme-court-refuses-to-stay-adani-s-rs-14-535-crore-jal-bid-asks-nclat-to-decide-expeditiously-13881037.html