RE: Adjournment11 Jun 2026 07:32
Like a few here, I think that this is actually positive for MPL. It appears that MPL is not the party who initiated the adjournment, as they would have otherwise stated in the RNS the reason(s) for doing so. There will be a number of possibilities for Adani to push this back; but I feel a likely scenario is that they are in the process of negotiating a settlement and anticipated that it would have concluded in the last couple of days, but didn’t, so they probably requested more time, so MPL has no choice but to inform the public of the delay. And, as mentioned, to not prejudice a settlement negotiation, the RNS obviously couldn’t mention anything of that sort, instead it suggested that Adani had initiated the postponement but looking to get it rescheduled (if it was an administrative/resource delay, I imagine a date of the new hearing would have been provided).
Obviously, this is a narrative I’m choosing to believe and I have no experience whether common legal proceedings elsewhere in the world are similar to those in India. DYOR GLA.