Vedanta alleges Jaiprakash bid process was ‘tailor-made’ for Adani despite its higher offer

Billionaire Anil Agarwal-led Vedanta Ltd has told the bankruptcy court that the bidding process in the Jaiprakash Associates Ltd bankruptcy case was “tailor-made” by the lenders in favor of the Adani Group.

Vedanta’s lawyer Abhijeet Sinha told the Delhi bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) led by Justice Ashok Bhushan on Friday that despite submitting the highest bid, the company was ignored and accepted Adani Enterprises Ltd’s offer. ₹15,000 crore resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates.

“No one has made a better offer than Vedanta. It seems to have been tailor-made by the CoC (committee of creditors) citing commercial wisdom,” Sinha said.

The appeals court will continue hearing the case on April 13.

The allegations point to an escalating high-stakes rivalry between two major Indian conglomerates for control of the debt-laden infrastructure company, which owns significant real estate assets in northern India, including land along the Yamuna Highway.

Vedanta questioned the design of the bidding process, claiming that key financial components of competing bids were not disclosed. He said bidders were only informed of the highest net present value (NPV) after each round, without providing clarity on up-front cash or deferred payment structures, limiting their ability to optimize bids.

Adani received approval from the CoC in November 2025, with 93.8% of votes in favor of the resolution plan. National Asset Reconstruction Co Ltd, the largest lender, played a key role with a voting share of around 82%. Other lenders include IDBI Bank (4.03%), Axis Bank (1.58%), Bank of New York Mellon (1.52%) and State Bank of India (1.33%).

The plan was approved by the Allahabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on March 17, 2026. Vedanta then moved the NCLAT and approached the Supreme Court to stop the scheme.

NCLAT’s decision

On April 6, the Supreme Court refused to stay the process, allowing the exercise to continue, but directed that any major decision regarding the resolution plan would require NCLAT’s prior approval. The outcome of the takeover now depends on the NCLAT’s decision.

Email queries sent to National Asset Reconstruction Co, Jaiprakash solutions specialist Bhuvan Madan, Vedanta and Adani Group remained unanswered till press time.

Vedanta argued that it was virtually the only serious participant in the five-round challenge process. The company said it improved its offer twice ₹250 crore and remained willing to develop it further. Despite this, the fact that the highest bid was not accepted raised concerns about transparency and fairness.

At the heart of the dispute is the interpretation of “value maximization” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Vedanta argued that the CoC, acting in a fiduciary capacity for all stakeholders, had failed to uphold this principle by opting for a scheme with a higher upfront payment rather than maximizing the overall recovery.

Vedanta said it had submitted a general offer of approximately 200 thousand lira. ₹17,000 crore, i.e. approx. ₹12,505 crore on an NPV basis and argued that it offers better value. But lenders preferred Adani’s plan due to higher upfront cash and faster payments, leading Vedanta to allege unfairness in the process.

Lenders defended their decision by arguing that resolution plans were evaluated not just on title value or NPV but on multiple parameters, including cash upfront, feasibility, applicability and implementation timelines. Adani’s plan was preferred ₹6,000 crore upfront and a faster payment plan of around two years compared to Vedanta’s longer payment horizon.

Adani’s solution plan has been fixed ₹14,543 crore, includes additional ₹800 crore towards capital expenditure and working capital, taking the total to approx. ₹15,343 crore. Against claims accepted for approx. ₹60,637 crore, which represents an improvement of around 24%.

With high-value assets at stake, including hotels, commercial assets, cement capacity and an F1 track, along with nearly 4,000 acres of land in Noida, Greater Noida and along the Yamuna Expressway, the final verdict in the case could set an important precedent in assessing value under the IBC and test the limits of the CoC’s commercial wisdom in rejecting a higher bid.