Delhi High Court orders SpiceJet to pay Rs.380 crore to Kalanithi Maran of KAL Airways

Since SpiceJet had failed to pay Rs.75 cr, the Delhi HC observed in the order on May 29 that there was no alternative except to call upon the airline to deposit the entire outstanding amount along with interest

Since SpiceJet had failed to pay Rs.75 cr, the Delhi HC observed in the order on May 29 that there was no alternative except to call upon the airline to deposit the entire outstanding amount along with interest
Since SpiceJet had failed to pay Rs.75 cr, the Delhi HC observed in the order on May 29 that there was no alternative except to call upon the airline to deposit the entire outstanding amount along with interest

Delhi High Court issues a ruling against SpiceJet; instructs it to pay Rs.380 cr to its former promoter, Kalanithi Maran

In a setback for SpiceJet, the Delhi High Court has ordered SpiceJet Ltd. to pay Rs.380 crore to Kalanithi Maran of KAL Airways and also asked it to submit an affidavit of assets within four weeks.

A single judge bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna said: “Since the judgment debtor had failed to pay an amount of Rs.75 crore to the decree-holder, hence in terms of para 15(ii) of the order dated 13.02.2023 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, there is no other alternative except to call upon the judgment debtors to deposit the entire outstanding amount qua interest forthwith, thus is so directed. Affidavit of assets be also filed within four weeks from today.”

The high court’s order came after the Supreme Court’s February 13 order, directing SpiceJet to pay Rs.75 crore within three months to KAL Airways, controlled by Kalanithi Maran, the former promoter of SpiceJet. However, the airline failed to do so.

The high court, in its May 29 order, said: “The learned senior counsel for the decree-holder submits an amount of Rs.75 crore has not been deposited as yet and hence the interest liability which was Rs.362.49 crore as noted in para 11 of the order dated 13.02.2023 has since increased to Rs.380 crore and thus the decree-holder insists for compliance of order dated 13.02.2023.”

The high court order originates from a long-running battle between the Maran family and the current promoter, Ajay Singh, and SpiceJet, over contractual obligations.

In the May 29 order, the high court said: “The learned senior counsel for the judgment debtor, however, submit they have already paid principal amount of Rs.579.08 crore and now the payment only qua interest is pending and they have already moved an application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court for extension of the time period for further three months to the judgment debtor to make payment of Rs 75 crore to the decree-holder.”

The high court said that the arguments of the decree-holder appear plausible as admittedly there is no modification of the February 13 order passed by the apex court, hence it needs to be followed.

Senior advocate Maninder Singh assisted by Nandini Gore, Sonia Nigam, Yash Dubey & Mr. Yashwant Gaggar from Karanjawala & Co. appeared on behalf of Kal Airways.

Counsel representing Kal Airways argued that SpiceJet had failed to comply with the order dated November 4, 2020, issued by the Delhi High Court, by not filing the affidavit of assets.

Additionally, SpiceJet was directed to pay an amount of Rs.242,93,70,845.56 within three weeks from the order passed by Delhi High Court on September 2, 2020. SpiceJet sought to modify this order, but their application was rejected. They then challenged these orders before the apex court, which directed them, through an order dated February 13, 2023, to encash the bank guarantee and pay the specified amount directly to Kal Airways. Despite the intervention of the apex court, SpiceJet was also required to pay an additional amount of Rs.75 crore to Kal Airways within three months, representing the liability for interest.

Singh further argued that the amount of Rs.75 crore had not been deposited yet, resulting in an increased interest liability of Rs.380 crore. Singh submitted that the timeline for the payment of the interest amount had already been determined by the Supreme Court, and thus the single judge had no authority to extend the time limit.

[With Inputs from IANS]

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here