Aviation – Delhi High Court Rejects SpiceJet Plea in ₹144 Crore Dispute
Aviation – The Delhi High Court has dismissed review petitions filed by SpiceJet and its promoter Ajay Singh, reaffirming its earlier directive that the airline must deposit ₹144 crore in an ongoing legal dispute involving Kalanithi Maran and Kal Airways.
Court declines review request
In a decision delivered on Monday, Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the airline’s request to reconsider the court’s prior order. The judge also imposed a penalty of ₹50,000 on both SpiceJet and Ajay Singh, underlining the court’s disapproval of the review attempt. The airline has now been instructed to immediately deposit the specified amount with the court registry.
The ruling reinforces an earlier directive issued on January 19, which required SpiceJet and Singh to deposit ₹144 crore within six weeks. This amount pertains to a larger admitted liability of ₹194 crore. Although the court had granted an additional four-week extension in March, the airline failed to comply within the stipulated timeframe.
Financial distress argument rejected
SpiceJet had sought relief from the court citing financial strain linked to geopolitical tensions in West Asia. The airline argued that the ongoing conflict had adversely impacted its operations and financial position, making it difficult to arrange the required funds.
Instead of depositing cash, the airline proposed offering a commercial property located in Gurugram as collateral. However, this alternative was not accepted by the court.
Opposing the plea, Kalanithi Maran and Kal Airways maintained that such arguments had already been presented before and dismissed by the Supreme Court. They urged the court not to revisit issues that had previously been settled.
Background of the dispute
The case stems from a long-standing disagreement between the parties regarding the issuance of warrants. Maran had alleged that warrants due to him were not issued following the transfer of SpiceJet’s ownership back to Ajay Singh.
This dispute traces its roots to February 2015, when Singh regained control of the airline during a period of significant financial instability. Since then, the matter has led to multiple rounds of litigation across various courts.
Related court proceedings
In a separate development, a Delhi court has temporarily halted the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against political commentator Abhijit Iyer Mitra. The case involves allegations of abusive remarks directed at nine women journalists associated with an online media platform. The relief was granted by Additional Sessions Judge Purushottam Pathak while hearing Mitra’s plea.
Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court has also issued orders safeguarding the personality rights of actor Arjun Kapoor. The court restrained unauthorised use of his identity, including his name, image, and voice, particularly in cases involving impersonation, merchandise sales, and the creation of deepfake content. It further directed the removal of any material found to be in violation of these rights.
Legal clarity and compliance stressed
The latest ruling in the SpiceJet case highlights the judiciary’s firm stance on compliance with financial obligations arising from legal disputes. By rejecting the review petitions and imposing additional costs, the court has signaled that previously decided matters cannot be repeatedly challenged without substantial grounds.
With the deadline now effectively enforced, attention will turn to whether SpiceJet complies with the directive in a timely manner. The outcome could have broader implications for corporate accountability in high-value commercial disputes.