Supreme Court Refuses Relief To Spice Jet Over ₹144.5 Cr Deposit In Kal Airways Dispute

Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by SpiceJet and observed that it was not inclined to interfere with the Order passed by the Delhi High Court rejecting SpiceJet’s plea seeking substitution of immovable property in lieu of the deposit of Rs. 144 Crores.

While dismissing the Petition, a Bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe further observed that although no interference with the impugned Order was warranted, the High Court may reconsider the plea for substitution afresh in light of the recent developments arising out of the ongoing war situation in West Asia and the time taken to avail the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme approved by the Union Cabinet.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had dismissed the SLP filed by SpiceJet against the Delhi High Court’s order dated 19 January 2026 directing deposit of Rs. 144 crores under the arbitral award in favour of Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd. and Kalanithi Maran. Subsequently, SpiceJet and Ajay Singh filed an application before the Delhi High Court seeking substitution of the deposit with immovable property, which was rejected on 18th March 2026 followed by the dismissal of Review Petition by the High Court on 4th May 2026.

The top court was hearing SpiceJet’s fresh plea challenging the Delhi High Court order of 4 May, which dismissed the airline’s review petition seeking relief from the ₹144.5 crore deposit direction and imposed a ₹50,000 cost on the carrier for filing repeated pleas.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for SpiceJet, sought around three months’ time for payment, arguing that the timeline aligned with the government support package announced on 5 May for the aviation sector, which he said was expected to become operational around July. Rohatgi submitted that the Centre had announced emergency credit support measures for the aviation sector, including a proposed ₹5,000 crore package for airlines, and sought breathing space until those funds became available.

Notably, 729 crore out of the total arbitral award amount of approximately ₹873 crore, including interest, meaning nearly 83% of the dues had already been discharged and only ₹144.5 crore remained outstanding.

The matter pertains to execution proceedings arising out of the arbitral award, which are being heard alongside the challenge to the award filed by SpiceJet and Ajay Singh under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

For the Respondents/Decree Holders, Mr. Jayant Mehta, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. Nandini Gore (Senior Partner), Ms. Sonia Nigam (Associate Partner), Mr. Akarsh Sharma, and Mr. Arjun Singh Gautam, Advocates from Karanjawala & Co., appeared.

For the Petitioners/Judgment Debtors, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi and Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocates, along with Mr. Sasiprabhu, Advocate, appeared.