Published on: 20August, 2022 at 16:53 IST
On Thursday, the Supreme Court heard the plea filed by airline company, SpiceJet Ltd., challenging the winding order passed by the Madras High Court. The airline company, SpiceJet, claimed that they have reached a settlement on their financial dispute with Credit Suisse and therefore, agreed to withdraw the Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the winding up order given by Madras High Court.
The matter was listed before the bench comprising of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices Hima Kohli and C.T. Ravikumar.
Background of the Case
A Switzerland based Stock Corporation and a Creditor, Credit Suisse AG filed a company petition against airline company, SpiceJet Ltd., alleging inability on part of the airline company to pay $ 24 million in debts owed to Credit Suisse AG.
Accordingly, in December 2021, the Madras High Court had passed a winding up order against SpiceJet. The single-judge bench of Justice R. Subramanian had ordered the Official Liquidator to take over the airline company’s assets. However, in January, 2022, the Supreme Court had stayed the winding up order, Advocate Harish Salve, appearing on behalf of SpiceJet, stated that the company was trying to reach s settlement with the Credit Suisse AG.
SpiceJet submitted in the proceedings before the Supreme Court, that there was one bank guarantee that was given to the Registrar of Madras High Court as per the High Court’s order. However, pursuant to the consent terms of the settlement between SpiceJet and Creditor Suisse AG, the said bank guarantee needed to be released from the court and returned back to the bank.
The Supreme Court asked SpiceJet to approach the Madras High Court and ask for the release of their bank guarantee.
The order passed by the Supreme Court states,
“There is a settlement which has taken place on 23.05.2022 as per the consent terms. In view of it, both the parties have satisfied the settlement and want to withdraw the SLP filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Parties are directed to abide by the consent terms. It is noted that some amount was deposited in the Madras High Court in pursuance of the order of Madras High Court. Parties are at a liberty to make an application for release of the money.”