RP, lessors in talks to maintain aircraft: Go First to Delhi High Court

Posted on by


The Resolution Professional (RP) of Go First told the Delhi High Court on Thursday that they are in talks with four lessors of the airline for a workable solution to maintain the aircraft.


Advocate Diwakar Maheshwari, appearing for the RP, told the court that they are in talks with the lessors, one of which is SMBC Aviation Capital, to maintain the aircraft.


“If you can work on a solution, there is nothing like it,” Tara Vitasta Ganju said.


Meanwhile, the lessors said the RP is not in a position to maintain the aircraft. “They must give it up,” one of the lessors told the court.


The next date of hearing is on December 20.


The court noted the RP has filed their status report, and the lessors in the case have filed their affidavit.


“Is this airline even capable of doing a test flight today without risk to life and limb?” one of the lessors of Go First had asked the Delhi High Court on December 5.


The court directed the Resolution Professional (RP) of the grounded airline Go First to file a response to a contempt plea by an aircraft lessor, saying the RP’s ‘records’ are ‘completely in disarray’, to put it mildly.


The lessor had said the RP wilfully refused to comply with the court’s orders.


“These (aircraft) are million-dollar assets. My learned friend (RP) says we are ready to fly the aircraft. In the teeth of the order, they are doing nothing. There has been no maintenance after May 19. These are court orders; they must be honoured. The longer the hearing drags on, the greater the responsibility of the RP to maintain the aircraft,” the lessor’s counsel had said.


“If the aircraft is not being maintained, that’s a problem for everyone,” Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju remarked.


Go First filed for voluntary insolvency on May 2 under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), and on May 10, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) admitted Go First’s insolvency plea.


Go First’s aircraft lessors had then filed an appeal against the NCLT order in the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The NCLAT upheld the NCLT order, and the matter was sent back to the NCLT.