5 min readNew DelhiMay 22, 2024 09:35 PM IST
First published on: May 22, 2024 at 09:19 PM IST
SpiceJet moved the Delhi High Court on Wednesday against an order that directed it to return two leased aircraft and three engines to TWC Aviation Capital Limited, an international business aviation company, by May 28.
The airline has challenged the May 15 order of a single-judge bench of the court which said that SpiceJet’s continued use of the airframes and engines without complying with the terms of the lease agreement would cause greater harm to TWC than the inconvenience caused to the airline.
It also noted that if the engines were not returned and properly serviced, TWC would suffer “irreparable harm” as this could cause “irreversible damage to the engines” and TWC would permanently lose its ability to monetise the engines.
Counsel appearing for the airline mentioned the matter before a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora on Wednesday, seeking urgent listing on Friday.
“To initiate that process would itself take three-four days. There are inspections which we will have to do. The flights are not in Delhi, they are everywhere around. A lot of coordination would have to be done. A lot of preparation would have to be done,” the counsel said.
Permitting the listing of the matter, the bench said, “If in order by 3 pm today (Wednesday) list on Friday.”
TWC sought enforcement of UK court orders
TWC moved the single-judge bench earlier this year in a lawsuit seeking the enforcement of two orders passed by a United Kingdom court in March directing SpiceJet to return two Boeing 737-8K9 aircraft and three engines to the company. It sought a declaration that the UK court’s orders were valid and binding.
The single-judge bench took note of the UK court’s orders and observed, “Despite the (UK court) orders, it is stated that the Defendant (SpiceJet) failed to comply with the directions and was found to have removed the engines and used them in other aircraft, without permission, leading to further legal notices from the Plaintiff (TWC).”
As per TWC, it entered into an agreement with SpiceJet on May 27, 2019, to lease the aircraft for 12 months at a basic monthly rent of $180,000, but the airline did not pay the rentals. The company further claimed that the airline breached even the various amendment agreements signed to accommodate payment difficulties due to the Covid pandemic.
SpiceJet contended before the single-judge bench that the UK court’s order was not enforceable in a lawsuit as per section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and that only an execution petition would lie in such a situation. Section 13 lists instances when a foreign judgment becomes inconclusive.
‘No reason to doubt validity of UK court judgment’
Perusing through the provision, the single-judge bench said that none of the conditions under section 13 apply as the UK court is the competent court “in terms of the agreement between the parties”.
The bench also said that SpiceJet had fully participated in these proceedings and that there was “no reason” for the high court to hold that the UK court’s order cannot be enforced in India.
“Even otherwise, when there are admitted dues, the Defendant (SpiceJet) cannot continue to enjoy the aircraft and the engines without making payments. In the present scenario, prima facie there is no material on record to doubt the validity of the order or judgement passed by UK court. Neither can it be said that the claims of the Plaintiff (TWC) are frivolous or vexatious. Further, it is the admitted position that the aircraft and engines are owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendant have failed to make payments as also breached the lease agreement,” the high court had said.
The single-judge bench also observed that SpiceJet had been given opportunities to make substantial payments to “prove its bona fides”. However, it said this “appeared to be not possible” for the airline considering its financial position and because the total dues claimed by TWC is now over $14 million.
“This Court is of the opinion that, as it is, sufficient damage has been caused by separating the engines from aircraft. The engines are being separately used…the separation of engines from the aircraft in this manner may not even be permissible in the opinion of this Court. The dues are not forthcoming from the Defendant (SpiceJet). Under such circumstances, this Court has no option but to direct that the aircraft along with the engines along with all relevant records relating to technical condition and usage of aircraft shall be handed over to the Plaintiff by 28th May,” the bench had said.
The airline challenged a court order from May 15, arguing that continuing to use airframes and engines without meeting lease agreement terms would harm TWC more than inconvenience the airline. (Representational image) 
Share
