Spupreme Courts’s decision in the Adani-Hindenburg case is out, Group m-cap surpasses Rs 15 lakh cr as Adani shares rise.

The following companies had gains of up to 10%: Adani Energy Solutions Ltd., Adani Enterprises Ltd., Adani Total Gas Ltd., Adani Green Energy Ltd., Adani Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd (Adani Ports), Adani Wilmar Ltd., and Adani Power Ltd.

As a result of the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision on a number of petitions pertaining to the Adani-Hindenburg dispute, which was announced on Wednesday, shares of the Adani group of firms maintained their early gains. The supreme court dismissed the use of the OCCPR report and any other third-party organization, stating that unverified reports of this kind cannot be accepted as evidence. According to the Supreme Court, Sebi has been instructed to conclude the remaining two cases within a three-month period, after the market regulator concluded its investigation into 22 of the 24 claims.

Huge victory of adani in supreme court

Up to 10% was obtained by Adani Energy Solutions Ltd, Adani Enterprises Ltd, Adani Total Gas Ltd, Adani Green Energy Ltd, Adani Wilmar Ltd, Adani Power Ltd, Adani Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd (Adani Ports), and Adani Wilmar Ltd. NDTV Ltd., ACC Ltd., and Ambuja Cements Ltd. all made jumps. With this, the market capitalization (m-cap) of the Adani group crossed the Rs 15 lakh crore threshold. In contrast, the group’s m-cap level from the previous session was Rs 14.46 lakh crore. This market capitalization is still far below the Rs 19.2 lakh crore that ten of the listed Adani group companies commanded on the day when Hindenburg Research released its damning study last year.

The SC declared that there is no basis to move the investigation in this instance and that the accusations made against the expert committee members are unfounded. According to the court, this can only be brought up if there has been an intentional or willful breaking of the regulations.

The Supreme Court ruled that although the court does have the authority to order an investigation under sections 32 and 142, it should exercise this authority carefully and petitioners must present substantial evidence in order to do so. It stated that one interim report had been placed and that 22 final investigations had been approved. The SC stated that Sebi should make logical decisions in this issue in compliance with the law.

Leave a comment