Delhi High Court: The present suit was filed by plaintiff, TWC Aviation Capital Ltd. for declaration, mandatory and permanent injunction, etc against defendant, SpiceJet Ltd. Prathiba M. Singh, J., opined that prima facie, the orders passed by the High Court of Justice in England Wales, Court (Business and Property Courts of England Wales King’s Bench Division Commercial Court) (‘UK Court’) were enforceable in the present proceedings in terms of Section 13 read with Section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (‘CPC’). The Court opined that keeping in view the principles of Comity of Courts and that a substantial sum of money was due from defendant to plaintiff, the Aircrafts and the engines deserved to be secured.
Background
Plaintiff submitted that it was the owner of two Boeing 737-800 Aircrafts with manufacturer’s serial numbers 34399 [VT-SXB] and 34400 [VT-SXC] (‘Aircrafts’) and three Aircraft Engines bearing Engine Serial No. (ESN) 895134, 894147 and 894206 (‘Engines’) and another engine bearing ESN 894207. Plaintiff submitted that vide Aircraft Lease Agreement dated 27-5-2019, the said aircrafts with the engines were leased out for a term of twelve months with a basic rent of USD 180,000 per month. Plaintiff submitted that defendant did not make the payment of the lease rentals and various amendment agreements were entered into to accommodate payment difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, these amendment agreements were also breached by defendant.
Plaintiff issued notice dated 5-3-2024 calling upon defendant to give certain undertakings and upon failure by defendant to comply with the same, plaintiff, in terms of the jurisdiction clause in the Agreement, approached the UK Court and instituted a suit, by way of Claim No. CL-2024-000145, against defendant. Despite the order dated 22-3-2024 of the UK Court, defendant failed to comply with the same and was found to have removed the Engines and used them in other Aircrafts, without permission. The orders of the UK Court were sought to be enforced through the present suit by seeking a declaration that the orders were valid and binding.
Plaintiff submitted that the orders of the UK Court were orders/judgements in terms of Section 13 read with Section 44-A of CPC and were enforceable in India.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court relied on Alcon Electronics (P) Ltd. v. Celem S.A. of France, (2017) 2 SCC 253, and opined that the suit arising from the UK Court was maintainable and could be enforced in India. The Court opined that the two orders of the UK Court were clear, vide order dated 14-3-2024, defendant was restrained from using, operating etc., both the aircrafts, from removing the parts etc. It was also directed to assemble all the records of the engines and be ready to deliver the same to plaintiff, if ordered by the Court. Subsequently, vide order dated 22-3-2024, the UK Court directed delivery-up of both the aircrafts and the three Engines to plaintiff and it also directed that the same should not be removed from India. Further interim order was also granted against use or operation of the engines in the meantime. Plaintiff was permitted to, after taking possession, make arrangement for storage and parking of the Engines, undertake inspection and maintenance of the engines, etc.
The Court opined that prima facie, the orders passed by the UK Court were enforceable in the present proceedings in terms of Section 13 read with Section 44-A of the CPC. The Court opined that keeping in view the principles of Comity of Courts and that a substantial sum of money was due from defendant to plaintiff, the Aircrafts and the engines deserved to be secured.
The Court directed that the aircraft frames which were standing parked in the Indira Gandhi International Airport, might be inspected by a team of officials of plaintiff who might take charge of the said aircrafts/frames, even if sans the engines. The same should, however, not be moved till further orders of this Court.
The Court directed Senior Counsel of defendant to seek instructions as to how and in what manner defendant intended to compensate/return the engines to plaintiff by next date of hearing.
The matter would next be listed on 8-5-2024.
[TWC Aviation Capital Ltd. v. SpiceJet Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Del 2592, Order dated 5-4-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Plaintiff: Ashish Dholakia, Senior Advocate; Ravi Nath, Ankur Mahindro, Rohan Taneja, Aditya Kapur, Siddhant, Abhijit Mittal, Ankesh Tripathi, Advocates
For the Defendant: Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate; K R Sasiprabhu, Kartikeya Asthana, Sumer Dev Seth, Riya Kumar, Advocates
