SpiceJet Share Price in Focus After Delhi High Court Dismisses ₹1,300 Crore Damages Appeal

The long-standing dispute between SpiceJet and its former promoter, Kalanithi Maran, along with his investment firm KAL Airways, revolves around a contentious share transfer that took place in early 2015. The conflict stems from the transfer of a 58.46% stake in the airline to its co-founder, Ajay Singh, for ₹2, along with the assumption of ₹1,500 crore in liabilities.

Singh, who originally launched SpiceJet, stepped back in to rescue the airline after it was grounded due to a severe financial crisis.

Tribunal’s Findings and Ruling

Following disagreements over the deal, particularly concerning ₹679 crore allegedly paid by Maran for convertible warrants and preference shares, the matter was taken to arbitration.

A 3 member tribunal, established in 2016 under the directions of the Delhi High Court, ruled that there was no breach of the share sale agreement. The tribunal dismissed Maran’s ₹1,323 crore damages claim and instead ordered Ajay Singh to pay ₹579 crore with applicable interest. It also directed Maran to pay ₹29 crore as penal interest.

Repeated Appeals and Final Verdict

Dissatisfied with the tribunal’s conclusion, Maran and KAL Airways took their case to the Single-Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court, which also rejected their claims. Subsequently, they appealed to the Division Bench, seeking the same damages.

SpiceJet, in a recent statement, confirmed that the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has now dismissed the appeal, affirming earlier rulings and effectively bringing the legal proceedings to a close.

Read More: SpiceJet Promoter Ajay Singh Completes ₹500 Crore Equity Infusion

Impact on SpiceJet Share Price

Following the announcement of the court's dismissal, investor sentiment turned positive. At 11:17 am on Monday, May 26, the share price of SpiceJet was trading at ₹44.97 on the BSE, registering a 2.55% rise.

Conclusion

This case marks a significant closure in one of the most high-profile aviation disputes in recent years. The Delhi High Court’s consistent rejection of the damages claim reinforces the strength of arbitration outcomes and contractual enforcement in India’s legal framework.

Disclaimer: This blog has been written exclusively for educational purposes. The securities mentioned are only examples and not recommendations. This does not constitute a personal recommendation/investment advice. It does not aim to influence any individual or entity to make investment decisions. Recipients should conduct their own research and assessments to form an independent opinion about investment decisions. 

Investments in the securities market are subject to market risks. Read all the related documents carefully before investing.