logo
Bhushan Power liquidation will hurt all stakeholders, JSW Steel and lenders tell SC

Bhushan Power liquidation will hurt all stakeholders, JSW Steel and lenders tell SC

Time of India16 hours ago

New Delhi:
JSW Steel
has transformed
Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd
(BPSL) into a viable and going concern after acquiring it out of bankruptcy in 2021, and its liquidation would have adverse ramifications on all stakeholders, the Sajjan Jindal-led steelmaker and BPSL's lenders told the
Supreme Court
.
They also sought an "open court" hearing of their petitions seeking a review of the top court's May 2 order scrapping JSW's acquisition of BPSL under the bankruptcy law. While JSW filed the review petition on Wednesday, the lenders that include
Punjab National Bank
and
State Bank of India
approached the top court with their plea last week.
JSW said it transformed the bankrupt firm's financial health and that its operational capacity has almost doubled to 4.5 million tonnes per annum now from 2.3 MTPA in 2017. BPSL's sales have since increased almost three times to ₹25,973 crore in the last fiscal year ended March 31 and exports have resumed with an annual average of ₹2,976 crore in the last four years, the company said in the review petition.
BPSL contributed ₹16,900 crore in taxes to the exchequer since 2021, the petition stated. Also,
JSW Steel
, which acquired BPSL under a ₹19,350-crore resolution plan, has made a capital investment of ₹5,788 crore in it.
In its order on May 2, the top court had termed JSW's resolution plan for BPSL 'illegal' and 'in gross violation' of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The court had also directed the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to initiate liquidation proceedings against BPSL. The SC later ordered status quo on the liquidation proceedings, after JSW Steel and the lenders said they would file review petitions.
About the allegation in the May verdict that JSW suppressed existence of a joint venture agreement with BSPL on the Rohne Coal block, the company's review petition said it had made due disclosures about it in the resolution plan and even the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) had noted them. 'When the ED (Enforcement Directorate) first raised the issue before NCLAT to clarify the relationship further, the petitioner (JSW) voluntarily submitted the JV agreement before NCLAT, despite there being no requirement to do so under law, to explain the background of formation of the JV,' the review petition filed through Karanjawala & Company said.
Supporting JSW's claims, the lenders said the resolution plan was successfully implemented by March 2021 and that the company had made an upfront payment of ₹19,350 crore.
The banks in their review plea said the May 2 judgement suffered from 'patent errors' on the face of the record. '…the impugned judgment's observations with respect to the JSW's eligibility under Section 29A being doubtful, not being properly verified by inter alia the CoC (committee of creditors) or not being supported by documents on record constitute an error apparent on the face of the record,' the lenders said, adding that the issue was not argued before the SC and hence, the observations in relation that were in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Section 29A of the IBC details conditions under which some individuals and entities are disqualified from submitting a resolution plan.
With regard to the SC finding that equity infusion of ₹8,550 crore as mandated by the resolution plan was not complied with and there was no material on record to substantiate that, the banks submitted that this 'conclusion has been reached without adequately considering that there is in fact documentary evidence, particularly minutes of meeting of the reconstituted board on March 26, 2021, to substantiate infusion of ₹8,550 crore equity.'
The May judgement failed to consider the factors that contributed to the delay in equity infusion, according to the banks' review plea filed through law firm Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
The petition also noted that the ED order for provisionally attaching BPSL assets had been issued on October 10, 2019, about 35 days after the NCLT approved the dent resolution plan on September 5 that year. 'The attachment by the ED was effectively released approximately five years later' on December 11, last year, the banks said in the petition.
The lenders told the SC that the May 2 judgement will likely have significant ramifications on future resolution plans because it might create uncertainty with respect to their implementation. Also, implementation of plans may effectively come to a standstill pending final adjudication of all legal challenges to the plan, which can take several years, they said.
BSPL owed more than ₹47,000 crore to lenders when the Reserve Bank of India put it on a list of companies for bankruptcy resolution in 2017. The NCLT began the resolution process in July that year, based on a petition filed by lead lender
Punjab National Bank
, which also initiated criminal proceedings in 2019 against former directors of the company after unearthing a ₹3,800 crore alleged fraud. JSW Steel acquired BPSL in March 2021 after its proposal was approved by the CoC and the NCLAT.
The NCLT had approved JSW Steel's offer in 2019, while holding that the successful bidder could not be held responsible for any alleged misdeeds of the previous promoters at any stage. The NCLAT upheld that decision in February 2020.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Amazon awarded ₹23.7 crore in damages, ₹77 crore towards legal costs by Singapore arbitration body in Future Group case
Amazon awarded ₹23.7 crore in damages, ₹77 crore towards legal costs by Singapore arbitration body in Future Group case

Mint

time5 hours ago

  • Mint

Amazon awarded ₹23.7 crore in damages, ₹77 crore towards legal costs by Singapore arbitration body in Future Group case

Amazon has been awarded a sum of ₹ 23.7 crore by the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) in damages linked to the tech giant's prolonged battle with Kishore Biyani-led Future Group, a new report has said. As per a report by Bar and Bench, the SIAC ruled that Future Group had breached its contractual obligations to Amazon when it entered into an agreement with Reliance, which was in violation to the terms of the pre-existing agreement. Livemint could not independently verify the details of the sum awarded to Amazon. This article will be updated once there is a confirmation. Amazon had originally sought ₹ 1,436 crore in damages — which is the amount it invested in Future Coupons Private Limited. However, it has only been awarded ₹ 23.7 crore. The company had also sought the legal costs it incurred in the arbitration proceedings as well as cases it had fought before courts and tribunals in India. According to sources quoted by Bar and Bench, the three-member SIAC tribunal held that the Future Group had indeed breached the contract and awarded 60 per cent of the legal costs that Amazon incurred during arbitration proceedings. It also refused to grant any costs related to the initiation or defence of allied proceedings. As per estimates quoted by the legal publication, Amazon awarded ₹ 77 crore and ₹ 6 crore in legal costs and arbitration fees, as opposed to the ₹ 125 crore it spent. The three-member tribunal comprised Prof Albert Jan van den Berg, Prof Jan Paulsson and Senior Counsel Michael Hwang. Future Group and Amazon had been locked in a bitter battle for over a year following a decision by the Indian retailer to sell its Big Bazaar business to Reliance Retail, a subsidiary of Reliance Industries. The deal was opposed by NV Investment Holdings LLC on grounds that its investment of ₹ 1,400 crore in Future Coupons, which is one of promoters of Future Retail, does not allow Future to sell retail assets to certain companies, including Reliance. At stake was whether Amazon can become a bigger force in a $900 billion retail market, with 1.3 billion consumers, than Reliance.

Bangladesh makes big move, set to affect relation with Gautam Adani, decides to...
Bangladesh makes big move, set to affect relation with Gautam Adani, decides to...

India.com

time6 hours ago

  • India.com

Bangladesh makes big move, set to affect relation with Gautam Adani, decides to...

New Delhi: Bangladesh has significantly reduced its outstanding dues under a power supply agreement with Adani Power in June as it paid $ 384 million to the company, say the sources. How much amount is due on Bangladesh? This amount of $ 384 million paid to Adani Power in June (till 27 June) is a part of the committed $ 437 million to be paid during the month, two sources aware of the matter said. This payment will clear Bangladesh's admitted claims till March 31. Once this amount of Adani's claimed dues is cleared, the total dues will come down to around $ 500 million (assuming Bangladesh meets its month-end commitment), they said. When was the deal made with Adani Power? Bangladesh has struggled to meet its payment obligations under the 2017 deal, as rising import costs following the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022 and the massive violent protests led by students in the country. The turmoil led to the ouster of prime minister Sheikh Hasina as she fled on August 5. This entire chain of events has squeezed the country's finances. Adani Power's action over non-payment As a result, Adani had halved supply last year and full supplies were resumed in March 2025 after the country's monthly payments started covering some of the dues. With the latest payments, Bangladesh has paid nearly $ 1.5 billion of the roughly $ 2 billion total billed amount. When contacted, an Adani Power spokesperson confirmed the payments but didn't share details on 'claimed' and 'agreed' dues stating these discussions are private. From which plant in India power was supplied? The 2017 power supply deal between Adani Power and Bangladesh had come in for scrutiny after the ouster of the Sheikh Hasina-led government last year. Interim government, led by Muhammad Yunus, called for the formation of a high-level committee, comprising energy and legal experts, to re-examine the power purchase agreement (PPA). Under the 2017 deal, Adani Power's Godda power plant in Jharkhand was to supply 100 per cent of the electricity generated from burning coal, to Bangladesh for a period of 25 years. Effect of cutting power After payment defaults, Adani had cut electricity supplies by half in November 2024 and restored full supply of 1,600 MW in March. Bangladesh stepped up repayments from July last year, clearing monthly dues. Bangladesh has been struggling to generate sufficient dollar revenues to cover the cost of essential imports such as electricity, coal, and oil. Its foreign currency reserves declined. IMF loan The interim government that succeeded her sought an additional $ 3 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on top of the existing $ 4.7 billion bailout package. Adani's power deal with Bangladesh was one of the many under Sheikh Hasina, which the current interim government has called opaque. Besides Adani Power, other Indian state-owned firms also sell power to Bangladesh, including NTPC and PTC India Ltd. (With PTI inputs)

Alleged move to ‘delink' BrahMos Thiruvananthapuram unit from parent organisation kicks up row
Alleged move to ‘delink' BrahMos Thiruvananthapuram unit from parent organisation kicks up row

The Hindu

time6 hours ago

  • The Hindu

Alleged move to ‘delink' BrahMos Thiruvananthapuram unit from parent organisation kicks up row

An alleged move to 'delink' the Thiruvananthapuram unit of BrahMos from the parent BrahMos Aerospace Pvt Ltd (BAPL), the Indo-Russian missile JV, has cast a pall of uncertainty over an enterprise that was once hailed as a model of Centre-State collaboration. Over the past few weeks, employees at the BrahMos Aerospace Thiruvananthapuram Ltd (BATL), situated at Chakka in the State capital, have been concerned over a reported move to separate BATL from BAPL, of which it is a wholly-owned subsidiary. They have sought the urgent intervention of the Kerala government to discourage any move that adversely impacts the future of the unit and jobs. When contacted by The Hindu, BATL managing director A. Joseph said the Thiruvananthapuram unit has not been delinked thus far, but he also did not fully rule out the possibility of such an eventuality. Mr. Joseph went on to add that he was not privy to the discussions taking place at the BAPL headquarters. Employees' unions argue that the Kerala government cannot be kept in the dark about such decisions with respect to BATL as the unit was established in 2007 by transferring the State government-run company Kerala Hi-Tech Industries Ltd (KELTEC) for a token ₹1. Unions allege that the BrahMos management have show utter disregard to the Thiruvananthapuram unit even at a time when Operation Sindoor has demonstrated the might of the BrahMos missile and the demand for its production is on the rise. They also note that BATL has run on a profit over the past 11 years, including a ₹24 crore profit in 2024-25. With the INTUC-led BrahMos Staff Association and the AITUC-backed BrahMos Employees Union conveying their apprehensions over the reported delinking move, Thiruvananthapuram MP Shashi Tharoor and CPI State secretary Binoy Viswam, who is also president of the AITUC-led union, have separately appealed to Defence Minister Rajnath Singh to urgently intervene to protect the unit. Mr. Tharoor noted in a June 27 letter that 'Employees were recently alarmed to learn - through proceedings at a Board of Directors meeting and the Annual General Meeting of BAPL - that a resolution had been passed to delink BATL from BAPL. This decision was taken without the prior knowledge or consultation of the State government, the employees, or the trade unions, and has been widely perceived as a disregard for the significance of this vital defence manufacturing unit in Kerala.' Mr. Viswam, in a June 4 letter expressed similar sentiment, and urged Mr. Singh to 'investigate this matter.' Both Mr. Tharoor and Mr. Viswam have urged the Defence Minister to allay fears by either retaining BATL under BAPL's structure or reconstituting it as a direct production entity under the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). KELTEC, situated on 15.80 acres near the Thiruvananthapuram airport, was transferred to BAPL, a JV of the DRDO and Russian company NPOM, on December 5, 2007. A.K. Antony was Defence Minister at the time in the Congress-led UPA government while Elamaram Kareem was Industries Minister in the LDF government led by V.S. Achuthanandan in Kerala. In connection with the transfer, a March 22, 2007, State Industries Department order observed that the Centre-State collaboration would provide Kerala with its 'first defence production unit.' It would also 'result in additional investments between at least ₹100 crore to ₹200 crore initially and may go up many fold.' Ends

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store