&w=3840&q=100)
Ex-promoters seek hearing in SC against verdict on liquidation of BSPL
The top court had on May set aside the resolution plan submitted by JSW Steel for the BSPL, holding it illegal and in violation of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
A bench comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi (since retired) and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma had also ordered the liquidation of BSPL under the IBC.
The former promoters of BSPL were Sanjay Singhal and his family, specifically including his father Brij Bhushan Singal and brother Neeraj Singal.
On Monday, senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for former promoters of the ailing firm, told a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran that the review plea be listed before a bench for an open court hearing.
The senior lawyer said the value of the assets of the company under liquidation have been fixed at a very low price by the tribunal and the remaining liability will have to be cleared by former promoters.
Let me constitute a bench, the CJI said. Usually, the review petitions against the apex court judgements are decided in chambers by the judges concerned by way of circulation.
The top court, in its verdict, had criticised the conduct of all key stakeholders in the resolution process, the resolution professional, the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), for enabling what it termed a "flagrant violation" of the IBC.
Justice Trivedi, since retired, criticised multiple stakeholders, including successful resolution applicant (SRA) JSW Steel Limited, for procedural lapses and failure to uphold the objectives of the IBC.
"Having thoroughly examined the entire matter factually and legally, we arrive at the following irresistible conclusions: the resolution professional had utterly failed to discharge his statutory duties contemplated under the IBC and the CIRP regulations during the course of the entire CIR proceedings of the corporate debtor, BPSL," the verdict had said.
The bench held that the CoC failed to exercise its commercial wisdom while approving JSW's resolution plan, which was in absolute contravention of the mandatory provisions of the IBC and CIRP regulations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Bhushan Power case: Supreme Court to hear JSW Steel's review plea on 29 July
The Supreme Court will hear JSW Steel Ltd's review petition on 29 July, challenging its 2 May judgment that quashed the company's ₹ 19,350 crore acquisition of Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd (BPSL) and ordered the firm's liquidation. A special bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma will take up the matter. Justice Sharma, along with Justice Bela M. Trivedi, was part of the two-judge bench that delivered the May verdict. However, following Justice Trivedi's retirement in June, a reconstituted bench will now hear the review plea. The review will be heard in chambers. Review petitions are typically heard behind closed doors by the same bench and without oral arguments, per Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules. However, in matters of significant public importance, the court may allow an open court hearing. Earlier, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the committee of creditors (CoC), had urged the court to permit an open hearing, citing broader implications. The review petition represents JSW Steel's last legal opportunity to retain control of BPSL, a company it took over through the corporate insolvency resolution process in 2021. Lenders such as State Bank of India and Punjab National Bank have also filed separate review petitions, supporting JSW's stance. JSW Steel has argued that since taking over BPSL in March 2021, it has turned around the company's operations. The company claims that production capacity has nearly doubled—from 2.3 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) in 2017 to 4.5 MTPA in 2025. Sales have nearly tripled, from ₹ 8,701 crore in 2016-17 to ₹ 25,973 crore in 2024-25, and exports have averaged ₹ 2,976 crore annually over the past four years. Both JSW and the lenders have warned that liquidation would be detrimental to BPSL, which has been running as a profitable and viable enterprise since the resolution plan was implemented. JSW made an upfront payment of ₹ 19,350 crore under the approved resolution plan, which was completed in March 2021. The Supreme Court earlier granted interim relief to JSW on 26 May by ordering a status quo on the liquidation proceedings, allowing the company to file for review of the 2 May judgment. The May ruling came in response to pleas filed by dissenting financial creditors, including Kalyani Group's Torsteel and former promoter Sanjay Singal. The court had invalidated JSW Steel's acquisition, citing non-compliance with key provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), particularly delays and deviations from the approved resolution timeline. BPSL was among the original 12 large non-performing accounts flagged by the Reserve Bank of India in 2017 for resolution under the IBC. At the time, the company owed lenders over ₹ 47,000 crore.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Kirloskar group dispute: HC allows KPL to resume brand licensing, with limits
The Bombay High Court has allowed Kirloskar Proprietary Ltd (KPL) to resume licensing the iconic 'Kirloskar' trademark to group companies, lifting a lower court's sweeping ban. In an interim ruling on 25 July, the court set aside a Pune court's January order that had barred any new brand licensing. However, it maintained a key restriction—no new licensees may compete directly with Kirloskar Brothers Ltd (KBL), the listed pumps and valves company. The 'Kirloskar' trademark has been used by several group firms since the 1920s. But by 1965, the founding family decided a single company should control the brand's use and integrity. This led to the formation of KPL, which became the custodian of the trademark for the benefit of all Kirloskar entities. Matters changed in recent years. Between 2015 and 2018, KPL, acting on legal advice, decided it needed to update long-standing user agreements. On 2 April 2018, it asked KBL and other group companies to sign new trademark agreements. KBL refused and instead filed a civil suit in Pune, sparking the current litigation. In June 2024, KBL filed for registered user status and, according to KPL, continued to breach the earlier agreements. KPL sent a breach notice, prompting KBL's legal challenge. On 9 January, the Pune court granted KBL broad interim protection, halting KPL from granting any new licenses for the mark. KPL appealed, arguing the lower court order "unilaterally altered decades-old governance arrangements" and was unfair to other group firms entitled to use the name. The HC largely agreed. 'There is no justification at the interim stage to restrain Kirloskar Proprietary from creating licensing rights in respect of the Kirloskar mark in accordance with its Articles of Association, this being the existing arrangement for the last 50 years,' said the bench, led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice MS Karnik. The court also noted, 'Even as per Kirloskar Brothers' own case, the use of Kirloskar marks was never intended to be nor it is exclusive to one company.' But the Court added a caveat: the longstanding rule that no new license should be issued for overlapping or competing business lines must remain. "As from 1969 till date, no license has been issued by the Kirloskar Proprietary to any other group companies of Kirloskar for use in respect of overlapping businesses, this position should continue,' the judges said. Both KBL and KPL are expected to present further arguments before HC on 11 August. Parallel to the trademark dispute, the Kirloskar Group is also embroiled in a battle with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi). In 2024, Sebi directed several Kirloskar companies—including Kirloskar Oil Engines, Kirloskar Pneumatic, Kirloskar Ferrous Industries, and others—to disclose a 2009 Deed of Family Settlement under new securities disclosure rules, even though the listed companies were not party to the agreement. These Kirloskar firms have challenged the constitutional validity of Sebi's amended Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements (LODR) Regulations. They argue that the rules are "arbitrary, wholly unreasonable," and contrary to contract law principles because they force companies to disclose agreements executed privately among promoters or family members—even when the listed entity itself is not a signatory. The HC has sought Sebi's response, and a hearing is scheduled for 20 August.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Reliance Infrastructure shares zoom nearly 5%; here's why
Reliance Infrastructure shares rallied 4.66% to the day's high of Rs 358 on the BSE on Monday, following two key announcements made on July 27: the conclusion of Enforcement Directorate (ED) action across all company locations, and the unveiling of a comprehensive growth strategy in Defence, Aerospace, and Renewable Energy by the leadership of Reliance Infrastructure and Reliance Power . Here are the details of the updates shared by the company: - ED action concludes with no impact on business operations On Sunday, Reliance Infrastructure announced that the ED's action had concluded at all company locations. The company stated that all officials fully cooperated with authorities and will continue to do so in the future. It further clarified that the ED action has had no impact on its business operations, financial performance, governance, employees, or any stakeholders. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Finance Project Management Management Data Science Healthcare Artificial Intelligence MCA Public Policy Others healthcare Cybersecurity Data Science MBA others Data Analytics CXO Design Thinking Leadership Degree Digital Marketing Technology Product Management PGDM Operations Management Skills you'll gain: Duration: 9 Months IIM Calcutta SEPO - IIMC CFO India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Fintech & Blockchain India Starts on undefined Get Details by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like War Thunder - Register now for free and play against over 75 Million real Players War Thunder Play Now Undo The company noted that the action appears to be related to decade-old transactions involving Reliance Communications Ltd (RCOM) and Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL)—two entities with which Reliance Infrastructure has no financial or business linkage. RCOM is currently undergoing insolvency proceedings under the IBC since 2016, while RHFL has been fully resolved following a Supreme Court judgment. Reliance Infrastructure emphasized that Anil Ambani is not on its Board and that proceedings involving RCOM or RHFL have no bearing on its governance or operations. Live Events The company reaffirmed that it continues to operate normally and remains focused on its business plans and delivering long-term value to all stakeholders. - Group leadership unveils Rs 18,000 crore strategic growth plan Alongside the ED update, more than 100 senior leaders from Reliance Infrastructure and Reliance Power convened to outline the group's next phase of growth. This follows recent approval by both company boards to raise Rs 18,000 crore via equity and debt to fund expansion across Defence & Aerospace, Power Distribution, and Renewable Energy. Both companies—Reliance Infrastructure and Reliance Power—are nearly debt-free, with net worths of Rs 14,883 crore and Rs 16,431 crore, respectively, and a combined public shareholding base of over 50 lakh investors. Key focus areas for Reliance Infrastructure include: - Defence & Aerospace: Plans to manufacture Falcon 2000 business jets in India in collaboration with Dassault Aviation, along with strategic partnerships with US-based Coastal Mechanics and Germany's Rheinmetall AG and Diehl Defence for advanced military manufacturing. - Power Distribution: Serving over 53 lakh households in Delhi via BSES, with continued emphasis on smart and sustainable power delivery. - Green Energy Goals: Targeting clean power sourcing for Delhi over the next five years. For Reliance Power, the focus remains on: Renewable Energy: Operating a portfolio of ~5.3 GW and securing ~3.3 GWh of Solar and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) projects—Asia's largest solar-plus-storage initiative. The leadership reiterated its commitment to converting challenges into opportunities, staying aligned with the vision of the late Shri Dhirubhai Ambani. Reliance Infrastructure shares had closed at their 5% lower circuit at Rs 342.05 on BSE on Friday. Also read: NSDL IPO: Issue opens on July 30, here's what you need to know about GMP, issue details ( Disclaimer : Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)
