On August 17, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) made the decision to postpone the hearing of three insolvency petitions brought forward by aircraft lessors against SpiceJet. In response, SpiceJet raised concerns about the legitimacy of the insolvency plea presented by Wilmington Trust SP Services (Dublin) Limited. The airline argued that the entity was acting solely as a trustee and not as SpiceJet’s operational creditor.
Regarding Aircastle’s insolvency pleas, SpiceJet challenged the admissibility of Aircastle’s initial insolvency petition, which had received a notice in May. The low-cost carrier contended that the petition was marred by technical flaws and thus not admissible. Aircastle, in response to SpiceJet’s challenge, submitted a reply and sought time to offer a rejoinder to that response. The case’s proceedings have now been deferred until September 11.
In June of the same year, Aircastle filed a second insolvency petition against SpiceJet. The NCLT questioned the acceptability of this subsequent insolvency plea. The tribunal requested Aircastle’s legal representative to elucidate how this plea could be considered admissible, citing relevant legal precedents.
During the latest hearing, Aircastle’s lawyer presented specific legal judgments to support the viability of a second insolvency petition. However, SpiceJet contested these arguments and requested time to counter Aircastle’s stance. Consequently, the tribunal adjourned the proceedings. The case has been rescheduled for August 18.
SpiceJet pointed out two areas of default: the authenticity of the power of attorney and the affidavit. The airline further asserted that it was safeguarded by Section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the defaults transpired during the Covid period, a time when the law offers protection.
