The Supreme Court Today (July 23) rejected Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways’ appeal in the SpiceJet case, calling their delay in filing a “calculated gamble.” The Court found their legal strategy dishonest and deliberate.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India firmly dismissed the appeal filed by Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways. They had challenged a Delhi High Court decision that criticized them for making a “calculated gamble” by delaying the filing and re-filing of their challenge against a 2023 arbitral award related to a financial dispute with SpiceJet.
The order was passed by a bench consisting of Justices PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar.
This case is part of a long legal battle between Kalanithi Maran and Ajay Singh, the promoter of SpiceJet. Their fight involves issues around the airline’s ownership and financial commitments.
In 2018, an arbitration tribunal—made up of three retired Supreme Court judges—ruled that SpiceJet must refund Rs 270 crore to Maran and KAL Airways. At the same time, the tribunal rejected other claims made by Maran’s side.
After the arbitration decision, both sides filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
These were heard by a single judge of the Delhi High Court, who on July 31, 2023, upheld the refund of Rs 270 crore in favor of Maran. But at the same time, the judge dismissed Maran’s other objections to the arbitral award.
SpiceJet and Ajay Singh then filed intra-court appeals in August 2023 within the legal deadline. After several hearings, a division bench gave its judgment on May 17, 2024. They ordered that the matter be sent back to a different single judge for a fresh hearing. Because of this, the Rs 270 crore refund order was temporarily put on hold.
Unhappy with this, Maran and KAL Airways approached the Supreme Court. However, their Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) were dismissed by the apex court on July 26, 2024.
Just four days later, on July 30, 2024, Maran and KAL Airways refiled certain defective appeals. These appeals were originally filed 55 days late and were left unresolved for 226 days due to pending objections.
The division bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul dismissed these appeals on May 24, 2025, saying they would not excuse either the original delay or the long delay in re-filing.
In a strongly worded decision, the Court criticised Maran and KAL Airways for their approach. The judges said their behavior showed a clear lack of honesty and was meant to mislead the Court.
The judgment noted that the delay was not due to a mistake or carelessness but was “part of a conscious litigation strategy.”
The Court also pointed out that while Maran’s side actively took part in the legal process triggered by SpiceJet’s timely appeals, they hid the fact that they themselves had already filed defective appeals which were just lying dormant.
According to the Court, the timing of the re-filing—just four days after their SLPs were rejected—clearly showed that this was “carefully orchestrated.”
The judges said the reasons given for the delay were not trustworthy or believable for someone acting in good faith.
The Court firmly rejected the request to excuse the delay, saying that limitation laws are meant to protect fairness and justice, and should not support people who act with clever and dishonest legal tricks.
The Court said this was not a case for showing mercy, and thus, the appeals were dismissed at the very start, without even considering their actual content.
- Kalanithi Maran was represented by Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, with lawyers Nandini Gore, Sonia Nigam, Swati Bhardwaj, Mohammad Shahyan Khan, and Akarsh Sharma from Karanjawala & Co.
- Kal Airways was represented by Senior Advocate Senthil Jagadeesan, assisted by Anugrah Robin Frey, Sukanya Singh, and Rohit Rahar from Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
- SpiceJet and Ajay Singh were represented by Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, along with lawyers Goutham Shivshankar, Chinmayi Chatterjee, and KR Sasiprabhu.
CASE TITLE:
KAL AIRWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED vs SPICEJET LIMITED AND ANR
SLP(C) No. 17270/2025
KALANITHI MARAN vs SPICEJET LIMITED AND ANR.
SLP(C) No. 17306/2025
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on SpiceJet
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
