Back
C. Hari Shankar, Ajay Digpaul, JJ
Kal Airways Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Spicejet Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the background of the arbitral award disputes and the procedural history of the associated appeals. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 2. the arguments regarding the permissibility of condoning delay in re-filing vs. original filing. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 3. bona fides are essential for condonation of delay; lack thereof precludes relief. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
% 23.05.2025 per C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. We have heard Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, learned Senior Counsel for Kalanithi Maran, “Kalanithi”, hereinafter and Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd.2 3, the appellants in these appeals and Mr. Amit Sibal, learned Senior Counsel for Spicejet Limited and Ajay Singh, “the respondents”, collectively hereinafter, the respondents in these appeals.
2. Arguments were heard on CM Appl. 45531/2024 in FAO (OS) (Comm) 171/2024 and CM Appl. 45540/2024 in FAO (OS) (Comm) 173/2024, which seek condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the appeals and on CM Appl. 45532/2024 in FAO (OS) (Comm) 171/2024 and CM Appl. 45541/2024 in FAO (OS) (Comm) 173/2024, which seek condonation of delay
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
