The M&A landscape of India is undergoing a major transition in 2025. The deal volumes are growing by 21% and deal values by 9% in 2025, H1. Therefore, the trend is apparent.
The Indian market is witnessing fewer, but more strategic transactions with bigger deals involved. But what’s leading these M&A in India? The biggest driver would be domestic consolidations. Simultaneously, regulatory reforms and investors’ confidence also play a considerable role.
Behind the evolving figures, a rigorous legal framework, strategic shifts, and major judicial interventions provide direction for these Mergers and acquisitions India deals. This blog goes deeper to explore two landmark India corporate mergers and acquisition deals.
The first one is the acquisition of Allianz’s stake by Bajaj Finserv. The other is Brookfield's acquisition of ATC India. In addition, we will share key insights from the Supreme Court’s rulings in the AGI Greenpac vs. HNG case.
This case law was a benchmark judgment in the context of procedural compliance, as established by the Indian Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). Based on these Case studies M&A India, we will examine the strategic rationale and intricate legal aspects of M&A in India, which significantly impact the Indian corporate legal landscape.
Understand How the 2024 Data Protection Act Shapes Corporate Liability
The Bajaj Finserv and Allianz Breakup
This acquisition marks a notable achievement in strategic control within a highly regulated corporate landscape.
Overview of The Acquisition Deal
In March 2025, Allianz SE’s 26% stake in Bajaj Allianz Life was acquired by Bajaj Finserv individually. The acquisition was worth INR 24,180 crore, marking the end of a 24-year joint venture. The acquired share of the business was split across three important Bajaj entities:
- Bajaj Finserv: 1.01%
- Bajaj Holdings and Investment Ltd: 19.95%
- Jamnalal Sons Pvt. Ltd: 5.04%
As a result, Bajaj received 100% ownership from both the insurance arms, along with irrefutable control over Bajaj Allianz Financial Distributors Ltd.
Strategic Rationale
Analysts say that this breakup was not the result of any abrupt fallout. Instead, legal experts see it as a result of strategic realignment. The chairperson of Bajaj Finserv, Sanjiv Bajaj, remarked that after full ownership, Bajaj would be able to process:
● Quick decisions, hence helping end customers enjoy quicker closures
● A unified branding, resulting in higher brand trust
● Higher operational agility
The two companies, working together, have already achieved a combined premium of INR 40,000 crores. They were already enjoying industry-best solvency margins. Total control enables Bajaj to scale higher, especially in the domain of digital insurance and also in the case of embedded finance.
Learn How Expert Legal Advisors Support Business Expansion in India
Legal Frameworks Applied
The transactions required some multi-tiered approvals. For instance, sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013, validate company restructuring. Once the restructuring proposal is passed as per this act, any company can proceed with an M&A process. The parties involved also need IRDAI clearance as per the Insurance Act of 1938.
In case there is a foreign stakeholder involvement (Allianz, in this case), the participating firms require clearance from FEMA, as per 1999 regulations. Finally, Bajaj had to comply with the Competition Act, 2002, also. The CCI approves M&A consolidations, as per this act.
What is the Future of Joint Ownerships?
Allianz’s retreat marks an example of a trend in global capital reallocation. Bajaj is allegedly in discussion with Jio Financial Services to launch another joint venture. The same move raises an interesting question: Is sole ownership the future in the highly regulated sectors like insurance?
Some experts argue that, due to increasing legal complexities, most alliance firms are now opting for solo ventures in high-stakes sectors. The cross-dependencies slow down operations and hinder their ability to make informed decisions and manage policy effectively.
Meanwhile, there is another major driver. FDI norms are liberalizing, and the conducive digital ecosystems are maturing fast. In this situation, most companies would prefer the strategic autonomy model.
If you are an emerging company and want a seasoned legal advisor or counsel to be by your side during M&A in India, consulting experienced attorneys would be a smart move.
Brookfield & ATC India Infrastructure Acquisition
In an all-cash deal, worth more than INR 2.5 billion, Brookfield Asset Management Company acquired complete stakes of ATC India. After this deal, Brookfield is the biggest solo owner of telecom towers in India. The company currently has over 253,000 towers.
The Data Infrastructure Trust executed this ordeal. However, what’s interesting to note in this case study is the vast spread of legal complexity and how that mattered in this deal.
The Strategic Rationale
The acquisition plan of Brookfield is a result of a long-overdue infrastructure pipeline. As 5G rolled out in India, the prowess of digital expansion seemed a reality. In that situation, an acquisition deal offered Brookfield more cash flows, quick economies of scale, and pan-India coverage.
However, the deal also inherited an INR 2,000 crore debt from Vodafone Idea. As a result, concerns rose regarding client concentration. Firstly, Brookfield needed a CCI approval as per sections 5 and 6 of the Competition Act of 2002. Moreover, share transfer and restructuring had to be validated as per the clauses of the Companies Act, 2013.
Analysis of Strategic Depth vs. Risk Exposure
The strategic move of Brookfield required rigorous legal assistance. Most importantly, the success of the deal was strongly based on Vodafone and Idea’s revival. In this instance, expert legal counsel helped the company to gain regulatory clarity on the telecom dues.
This acquisition underscored the importance of strong legal counsel in pan-Indian solo acquisitions, especially where unrequited financial dues hold a complex position.
Analysis of a Judicial Turning Point: AGI GreenPac vs. HNG
This case redefined M&A in India under the IBC. The resolution plan of AGI GreenPac to acquire Hindustan National Glass was approved by the Committee of Creditors in 2022. However, the deal has not received CCI clearance so far.
In January 2025, the Supreme Court struck down the plan. The ruling mentioned that CCI approval must come first. Any coC approval that precedes CCI approval was termed null and void by the Supreme Court. In reinstating the verdict, the court cited Section 31(4) of the IBC.
Legal Implications
Greenpac did not hire an experienced corporate law firm to assist them in this deal. The in-house legal counsel failed to notice this gap, which created a major setback. On that note, CCI clearance is a major prerequisite and not a legal formality. Then there is a Gun-jumping risk. In simpler words, a premature implementation could attract penalties. In this case, the same risk was invited by Greenpac. This gesture again highlights the absence of the best corporate lawyers in India.
There was a significant market impact post the Supreme Court backlash. The stock value of AGI Greenpac fell 18.9% as the Supreme Court’s verdict rolled out.
Analysis: Speed vs. Scrutiny
The ruling of the Supreme Court highlights the presence of procedural rigidity in the M&A in India involving insolvencies like this case or the previous one. Such an issue can have major consequences, including delayed deal closures and a negative impact on the company's stock value.
For all distressed buyers, it implies a longer timeline and higher compliance costs. But the most dire consequence is greater uncertainty. However, the hiring of an experienced law firm could have saved AI Greenpac from these problems.
Pro Tip: The judgment of the Supreme Court in this case clarifies the temporal intersection of the IBC with the Competition Act. This case law will hence reduce ambiguity for future bidders.
Key Takeaways For Legal and Corporate Stakeholders
Legal counsel is mandatory for M&A deals. In fact, companies must plan and process such Iconic corporate deals India under the strong patronage and supervision of experienced legal counsel. Consult a lawyer with relevant experience for more information on hiring a corporate lawyer. But that’s not all. There are other takeaways as well:
1. Regulatory Sequencing is Mandatory Now
From the AGI Greenpac, it is clear that CCI approval must come first, especially in the case of insolvency-related deals of M&A in India.
2. Embed a Clear Legal Strategy
You can’t loop in your legal teams in post-term sheets only. They should play a decisive role in the competition assessment, control analysis, and in filling triggers. This approach will reduce delays and improve your negotiation position.
3. Judicial Trends are Reshaping Deal Timelines
The rulings of the Supreme Court are no longer rare disruptions. They are shaping the future of most corporate deals. Therefore, it is quintessential for the legal allies (law firms working closely with a company) to look into the judicial interpretations and override any regulatory discretion.
Share:
Share on
×