New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up unsuccessful bidding companies in insolvency cases for challenging commercial decisions taken by lenders, warning that such attempts undermine the design of India’s bankruptcy framework.A bench led by Justice B.V. Nagarathna made the observations while upholding the resolution plan of Sarda Energy & Minerals Ltd for SKS Power Generation (Chhattisgarh) Ltd.The court dismissed appeals filed by Torrent Power Ltd, Jindal Power Ltd and Singapore-based Vantage Poin ...

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court ruled that telecom spectrum is a scarce public resource and cannot be transferred or sold under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), marking a significant win for the government and a setback for lenders involved with Aircel Ltd [7]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Court Rulings - The court stated that the bankruptcy code cannot guide the restructuring of ownership and control of spectrum, emphasizing that its control must be secured for citizens [1][7]. - The court dismissed appeals from the State Bank of India-led committee of creditors and others, who argued that spectrum, as an intangible asset, could be monetized under the insolvency process [7]. - The court found that spectrum allocated to telecom service providers (TSPs) cannot be subjected to IBC proceedings, reinforcing that the statutory regime under IBC should not interfere with the telecom sector's legal framework [4][7]. Group 2: Implications for Telecom Sector - The court criticized the lenders' interpretation of the law as "myopic," stating that the entirety of the telecom sector cannot be governed by the IBC due to differing subjects and purposes of the statutes involved [5][7]. - The tripartite agreement between the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), TSPs, and banks is designed to secure financial assistance for phone companies while protecting lender interests, but lenders are barred from operating services [6][7]. - The court highlighted that while the telecom license may be conditionally transferable to protect lender interests, such transfers remain under the licensor's regulatory control [6][7]. Group 3: Ownership Rights and Asset Classification - The IBC explicitly excludes assets over which corporate debtors do not have ownership rights from the resolution framework, aligning with the 2015 Bankruptcy Legislative Reforms Committee Report that states not all assets can be liquidated [6][7].

The Supreme Court on Friday (February 13, 2026) laid down that telecom service providers (TSPs) do not own spectrum, a precious and finite public resource meant to be used for the common good of all, and cannot include it among their pool of “assets” for insolvency or liquidation.A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul Chandurkar held that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) excludes any assets over which a corporate debtor has no ownership rights.“Mere recognition of spectrum licensing rights as an in ...

NEW DELHI/MUMBAI: The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that telecom spectrum is a “material resource of the community” and cannot be treated as an ordinary asset under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to repay lenders in the insolvency proceedings of Aircel and Reliance Communications (RCom).A bench comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Atul Chandurkar held that spectrum belongs to the people of India, with the government acting as trustee, and that the IBC cannot override the statutory framewo ...

New Delhi: Billionaire Anil Agarwal-led Vedanta Ltd on Thursday urged the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to review a decision by lenders to approve Adani Enterprises Ltd’s over ₹15,000 crore resolution plan for bankrupt Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL).Terming the approval a “commercial conspiracy”, Vedanta challenged the November 2025 decision of the committee of creditors (CoC) in the Allahabad bench of the NCLT and requested the tribunal to send the plan back to lenders for fresh consideration.Senio ...

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court is deliberating on the treatment of telecom spectrum held by Aircel and Reliance Communications (RCom) during their insolvency proceedings, with a decision pending that could clarify the ownership and monetization of spectrum under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The Supreme Court is reviewing petitions from State Bank of India (SBI) and the two insolvent telecom companies, challenging a 2021 order from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) regarding the transferability of spectrum during insolvency [2][7]. - The court's decision will address whether telecom spectrum is an asset that can be liquidated under the IBC or if it remains a government asset, as the government claims it is held in trust for the public [6][7]. Group 2: Arguments Presented - Advocates for Reliance Telecom's resolution professional argue that the telecom department has accepted the IBC's framework and cannot deny its role in the insolvency process [3][4]. - The argument emphasizes that without the spectrum and licenses, the companies would be left with no viable assets for resolution, potentially undermining the IBC's objectives [5][6]. Group 3: Stakeholder Positions - SBI contends that the telecom spectrum should be considered part of the insolvency process and can be sold to recover dues, positioning it as an intangible asset [6][7]. - The government maintains that the spectrum belongs to the state and cannot be sold or transferred under insolvency proceedings, asserting that the license only grants usage rights [6][7].

Core Insights - The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has approved Vedanta's ₹17,000-crore bid for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL), setting up a competitive landscape with Adani Group's previously approved ₹12,600-crore bid [1][2] - JAL, despite its liabilities of ₹55,371 crore as of September 2025, is viewed as a highly attractive acquisition target due to its diversified portfolio [1][6] Group 1: Acquisition Context - Six major companies have had their bids approved for JAL, including Vedanta, Adani Group, Jindal Steel & Power Ltd, PNC Infratech, Suraksha Group, and Dalmia Bharat [2] - JAL has received a total of 26 bids, with the final contenders being Vedanta and Adani Group [7] Group 2: JAL's Financial Background - JAL was founded in 1982 and became a significant player in India's infrastructure sector, known for projects like the Yamuna Expressway [4] - The company faced financial difficulties due to over-leveraging and operational challenges, leading to its bankruptcy proceedings initiated by ICICI Bank in 2018 [5][6] Group 3: Strategic Importance of JAL - For conglomerates like Vedanta and Adani, acquiring JAL offers strategic opportunities across various sectors, including cement, infrastructure, and real estate [9][10] - JAL's assets include cement plants, captive power units, limestone mines, and prime real estate, which are critical for expansion in north and central India [10][11] Group 4: Implications for the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) - The competitive bidding for JAL indicates the evolution of the IBC from a creditor recovery tool to a platform for strategic acquisitions [12] - Bidders can leverage discounted valuations and regulatory protections under the IBC framework, reshaping the landscape of corporate control [13][14] Group 5: Next Steps in the Acquisition Process - Following CCI approval, the committee of creditors (CoC) is reviewing bidders' financing plans and will evaluate non-conditional resolution plans over the next few weeks [15] - The final resolution plan is expected to be voted on by the CoC in November, requiring at least 66% approval before submission to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) [16] Group 6: Status of Other Jaypee Group Entities - Other entities within the Jaypee Group are also undergoing insolvency proceedings, with some already acquired, such as Jaypee Infratech Ltd by Suraksha Group [18]