The case came up for hearing before Justice Vikas Mahajan on Thursday, who asked SpiceJet to file an affidavit disclosing its assets. However, senior advocate Amit Sibal, appearing for the airline, sought time to obtain instructions on the issue.
The next hearing will be on Monday on the question of whether SpiceJet should be directed to disclose its assets.
Sibal opposed any immediate direction on asset disclosure, arguing that SpiceJet is a running airline and not a fly-by-night operator, and said coercive directions could disrupt operations. He told the court that the airline operates around 135 flights daily, carries nearly 21,000 passengers a day and employs about 6,400 people.
“It’s a running airline…This is not a fly-by-night operator,” Sibal submitted.
He also opposed immediate disclosure of assets, arguing that such a direction could affect other pending proceedings involving the airline.
“This will affect me in other matters… because in every other matter then they’ll ask for an affidavit of assets,” Sibal argued, adding, “An airline can’t run in that fashion.”
Appearing for Sunbird, senior advocate Rajshekhar Rao sought interim protection and argued that the lessor was not trying to halt SpiceJet’s operations, but only seeking safeguards while the case remains pending.
Rao alleged that despite pending dues to creditors, SpiceJet had paid advance compensation to its chairman.
“The chairperson, Mr. Singh, is paid $3.4 million in advance by way of salary for five years in September 2025, when monies are owed to the world at large,” Rao told the court.
The proceedings stem from a judgment delivered by the Commercial Court in London on 13 March, a copy of which was reviewed by Mint.
The dispute relates to three aircraft engines leased to SpiceJet in 2019. According to the UK judgment, Sunbird alleged that SpiceJet stopped making rental payments from January 2022 onwards, except for one payment of $7,088.19 received in May 2024. The lessor also claimed that the airline failed to pay maintenance accruals from November 2020. Maintenance accruals are periodic payments made by airlines to cover future engine overhaul and replacement obligations.
Following the alleged defaults, Sunbird issued notices in July 2022 and later repossessed the engines in phases. Two engines were repossessed in December 2022, while the third was taken back in July 2023.
Sunbird subsequently moved the London Commercial Court seeking recovery of $7.96 million in unpaid rent and maintenance charges across the three engines. The claim covered dues linked to Engine 161, Engine 482 and Engine 925.
A notable aspect of the UK proceedings was that SpiceJet did not contest the case. The London court recorded that although the airline had initially engaged solicitors and had been served, it neither filed a defence nor participated in hearings, observing that the airline had “chosen not to participate.”
The court consequently granted summary judgment in favour of Sunbird, holding that SpiceJet had “no real prospect” of defending the claims.
A summary judgment is a court order passed without a full trial when the judge finds that one side has no realistic chance of successfully defending the case and there is no need for a detailed hearing.
The latest proceedings add to SpiceJet’s broader legal troubles at a time when the airline is already battling a long-running arbitration dispute with Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways over unpaid dues.
SpiceJet had earlier told the Supreme Court of India on 19 May that it would clear its dues once it received support under the government’s proposed ₹5,000-crore package for airlines aimed at helping carriers cope with rising fuel costs and flight disruptions.
The airline told the court it currently lacked funds to clear the dues and had limited assets apart from a property in Gurugram. Taking note of the situation, the Supreme Court granted interim relief and asked the Delhi High Court to reconsider its plea.
