Case Length: 10 Pages
Period: 2007-2019
Pub Date: 2022
Teaching Note: Available
The case study discusses the rise and fall of Jet Airways (India) Limited, a major airline in India. It helps students understand the various warning signals which, if read properly, would have made it apparent that the company was financially unviable. The case also helps to evaluate the various reorganization strategies.
Bankruptcy Filing; Bankruptcy; Bank-Led Provisional Resolution Plan; Non-bankruptcy resolution; Indicators of bankruptcy; Negative net worth; Altman Z-score; Financial analysis; Identifying the probability of bankruptcy; Bankruptcy risk; Profitability Analysis; Liquidity Analysis; Bankruptcy Prediction Analysis;
Buy this case study (Please select any one of the payment options)
| | |
Copyright © 2020 - 2025 All Rights Reserved - icmrindia.org
Jet Airways: An Insolvency Resolution Journey
Jet Airways, which started off as an air taxi operator in 1993 and became a scheduled carrier in 1995, has been under insolvency for two years after it shut operations in April 2019 under a heavy debt. Jet Airways is the first Indian carrier/airline to undergo insolvency proceedings under the Cross Border Insolvency Protocol along with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) of India.
A Company petition was filed in the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai against Jet Airways (India) Limited ("Company") u/s 30(6) read with Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 for the initiation of insolvency proceedings by State Bank of India in the capacity of it being a Financial Creditor to the Company.
An applicant name Ashish Chhawchharia was a Resolution Professional for Jet Airways (India) Ltd. An application was filed by the Resolution Professional seeking approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by Jalan Fritsch Consortium, which consists of Mr. Murari Lal Jalan (a Non-Resident Indian based in United Arab Emirates) and Mr. Florian Fritsch (Kalrock Capital Partners Ltd, Cayman [KCPL]).
The Insolvency Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors as well as the NCLT, Mumbai via order dated 22 nd June 2021.
The tribunal decision comes exactly two years after the insolvency procedures began. The Mumbai bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) cleared the resolution plan to revive Jet Airways and directed the Jalan-Kalrock consortium to get the required approval and licences to restart the airline within 90 days.
The tribunal rejected pleas by lawyers representing the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) against the approval. DGCA and MoCA previously stated that the consortium cannot claim historicity on slots that were held by Jet before its bankruptcy. The slots were later distributed to other airlines. Hence, the consortium's demand for historicity of airport slots was rejected. With reference to Section 14(1)(d) of the Code, the learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India relied upon the principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajendra K. Bhutta v. Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority & Anr.: (2020) 13 SCC 208 and submitted that the Corporate Debtor was not in possession of the slots on the date of the insolvency commencement. It accordingly cannot claim any right to the slots.
In October 2020, the committee of creditors (CoC) approved the Jalan-Kalrock consortium's resolution plan. The consortium proposes to invest ₹600 crore in the first two years to repay creditors and acquire an 89.79% stake in the carrier. The resolution plan also proposes selling existing non-core assets such as real estates and luxury cars by the end of the first year and said it will repay to financial creditors, ₹131 crore, ₹193 crore, ₹259 crore at the end of the third, fourth and fifth years, from the airline's cash flows, respectively. The company intends to repay creditors a total of ₹1,183 crore over five years, which includes collections from asset sale proceeds and cash flows.
As a result, the new promoters will also retain the 'Jet Airways' brand and will resume operations with about 25 aircraft, with a base in New Delhi, and restart international flights soon after. Accordingly, the Articles of Association (AoA) and Memorandum of Association (MoA) shall be amended and filed with the Registrar of Companies (RoC) concerned for information and record. For the plan to be implemented effectively, the Resolution Applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals, under any law for the time being in force, within such period as may be prescribed. The Monitoring Committee shall supervise the implementation of the Resolution Plan and shall file Status Report of its implementation before this Authority from time to time, preferably every quarter.
The Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the role of the NCLT is 'no more and no less'. The NCLT matter was taken up the Coram: Janab Mohammed Ajmal, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Shri V. Nallasenapathy, Hon'ble Member (Technical). The order pronounced I.A. No. 2081/2020 in C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019.
The Resolution Plan submitted by consortium of Mr Murari Lal Jalan and Mr Florian Fritsch annexed to the Application is hereby approved. It shall be binding on the Corporate Debtor, its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, any State Government, or any local authority to whom a debt in respect of the payment arising under any law for the time being in force is due, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan. Therefore, the resolution plan was so accepted and approved.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.
Jet Airways (India) Ltd is a Mumbai-based international airline. It was once India’s largest airline. From its main hub at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport and secondary hubs at Chennai International Airport, Indira Gandhi International Airport, Kempegowda International Airport, and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport, it operated over 300 flights per day to 74 destinations worldwide.
To better understand the reasons for the company’s continuous growth, let’s look into the SWOT Analysis of Jet Airways, which is required for any company to survive and thrive in the market.
A SWOT analysis is used to assess a company’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Its primary goal is to assist organizations in gaining a thorough understanding of all the factors that influence business decisions.
So, in this case study, we’ll learn about Jet Airways and the SWOT Analysis of Jet Airways. So, Let’s get started.
Jet Airways Ltd. is an Indian airline headquartered in Mumbai. It was established as a private company on April 1, 1992. It was founded by Naresh Goyal, a London-based businessman. On May 5, 1993, they began operations as an Air Taxi Operator with a fleet of four leased Boeing 737 aircraft.
On January 14, 1995, they were granted scheduled airline status and later on it became a recognized public company on July 1, 1996. It was then reorganized as a private company on January 19, 2001, and on the 28th of December, 2004, it became a public company.
Jet Airways was India’s first private airline to operate to foreign destinations. In India’s domestic market, it has a reasonably large market share (about 20%)
Now that we’ve covered the company’s fundamentals, let’s look at Jet Airways’ S.W.O.T analysis in the section below.
A SWOT analysis is a method of determining a company’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
It’s a great tool for figuring out where the company excels and where it falls short, devising countermeasures, and figuring out how the company can grow. So let’s analyze Jet Airways’ SWOT analysis in the section below.
SWOT Analysis of Jet Airways | IIDE
The distinct capabilities of an organization that gives it a competitive advantage in capturing more market share, attracting more customers, and maximizing profits are referred to as its strengths.
Weaknesses are aspects of a company or brand that need to be improved. So, let’s take a look at Jet Airways’ major weaknesses:
Opportunities are areas in which a firm might focus in order to improve outcomes, sales, and, eventually, profit. So, let’s see what kind of opportunities Jet Airways can pursue in order to achieve excellent results.
Environmental variables that can inhibit a company’s growth are known as threats. Some of Jet Airways’ threats are as follows:
Let’s wrap up the case study in the section below now that we’ve thoroughly examined Jet Airways’ SWOT Analysis.
As time passes, Jet Airways evolves in every possible domain of the aircraft industry, provided that the challenges and threats grow in accordance with the market opportunities. As a result, it must change its operational priorities in order to meet the expectations of both the high and low end of the demanding population.
The market division, thus dividing the aircraft industry into parts based on the mode of operation, has forced airliners like Jet Airways to do something renowned and distinct to stand out from the crowd.
The company’s SWOT analysis aided in the formulation of key recommendations, such as establishing a new vision and strategy and adhering to current performance indicators.
Please let us know what you think about this case study in the comments section below. Thank you for reading this, and if you enjoyed it, please share it with your friends and family.
Read more such insightful case studies on IIDE’s case studies page.
Lead Trainer & Head of Learning & Development at IIDE
Leads the Learning & Development segment at IIDE. He is a Content Marketing Expert and has trained 6000+ students and working professionals on various topics of Digital Marketing. He has been a guest speaker at prominent colleges in India including IIMs...... [Read full bio]
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Submit Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .
by Aditya Shastri | May 15, 2024
Uniqlo is a Japanese clothing brand known for its high-quality essential pieces formed from the...
In this article, we will learn about the marketing strategy of Bata India, the largest footwear...
Bharti Airtel is one of the three telecom giants of India, known for its distinct and engaging...
" * " indicates required fields
By providing your contact details, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy
How is this helpful for me?
Know more
Report a problem
IA453/2020InCP(IB)2205/MB/2019
SECTION 70 CONTRACT ACT 1872
Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code)
Section 5(13)(c) of the Code.
section 25(2) (a) of the Code
Section 25(1) of the Code.
Section 19(2) of the Code
Section 7 of the Code
2019. 3. Section 25(1)
Section 5(13)(c)
Application filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 seeking declaration of monthly fees payable to Applicant as part of IRP costs, permission to file claims for payment of monthly fees and direction to treat claims as IRP costs.
Application allowed. Monthly fees payable to Applicant under service agreements for relevant period declared as part of IRP costs in terms of IBC. Applicant permitted to file claims with Respondent/Liquidator for payment of monthly fees for relevant period under service agreements. Respondent/Liquidator directed to treat any claims of Applicant relating to monthly fees for relevant period under service agreements as IRP costs. Ad interim/interim reliefs granted.
Section 5(13)(c) of the Code explicitly includes cost incurred by Respondent to keep Corporate Debtor as going concern as part of CIRP costs. Applicant entitled to payment of consideration in priority as provided under Section 70 of the Contract Act, 1872 read with Section 53 of the Code. Leave and License agreement had clause for termination in case of default by Corporate Debtor and breach not cured within 30 days. Resolution Professional required to preserve and protect assets of Corporate Debtor, including continued business operations. Company entitled to receive refundable Security Deposit post termination of leave and license agreement. Applicant not entitled to payment of licence fee after 31st May, 2019. On receipt of balance security deposit, Respondent to hand over vacant possession of premises to Applicant within 7 days.
1. This is an Application filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) seeking the following reliefs:
a) Declare that the monthly fees payable to the Applicant under the service agreements for the relevant period shall form part of the IRP Costs in terms of the IBC;
b) Permit and allow the Applicant to file its claims with the Respondent / Liquidator for payment of the monthly fees for the relevant period under the service agreements;
c) Direct the Respondent / Liquidator to treat any claims of the Applicant relating to monthly fees for the relevant period under the service agreements as IRP Costs;
d) Ad interim / interim reliefs in terms of the above.
2. This Bench by an order dated 20/06/2019, initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor on a petition under Section 7 of the Code filed by the Financial Creditor. The Respondent herein was appointed as the Resolution Professional (RP) of the Corporate Debtor.
3. The following are the submissions of the Applicant: NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 3 of 13
a) The Applicant permitted the Corporate Debtor to use its premises at 301B, 302, 401 and 404 of Kaledonia, Sahar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai, for office purpose on Leave and License basis pursuant to a Leave and License Agreement dated 24/02/2011 executed between the Applicant and the Corporate Debtor. Further an Amenities Agreement dated 24/02/2011 was also executed between them to use certain amenities and facilities in connection with the Corporate Debtors occupation and use of the licensed premises.
b) The Corporate Debtor failed to pay the monthly rent w.e.f. March, 2019 to the Applicant. The Applicant sent a notice dated 30th April, 2019 to the Corporate Debtor calling upon to make the payments under the service agreements, failing which the Corporate Debtor would have to vacate the licensed premises. The said notice is extracted below.
i) We write pursuant to instructions from, and on behalf of our client Mack Star Marketing Private Limited (Our Client). ii) We refer to our letter dated 28 February, 2019 (Our Letter) pursuant to which Our Client had requested that you deposit license fees in connection with the office space used by you in Kaledonia, Andheri (Kaledonia), to Our Clients account in ICICI Bank. iii) Our Client notes that despite this request being shared with you almost two months ago, you have not yet deposited such amount in the ICICI Bank Account. Our Client is hereby giving you an opportunity to cure the breach of your obligations by depositing the payments in the ICICI Bank Account within 30 days of this letter. If this is not done, Our Client will have the right to terminate the leave and license agreement and you will be required to immediately vacate all the office space (together within any common and parking area) occupied by you in Kaledonia. iv) Please note that Mr. Sumit Ranjan Saha, director of Mack Star (i.e. Our Client), is the sole authorized representative of Mack Star, authorized to negotiate, deal on behalf of, and represent Mack Star in relation to this issue. All future communications NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 4 of 13 with Our Client must be directed to [email protected] or to us at the address specified on this letterhead.
v) This letter is without prejudice to any of the rights or remedies available (or which may be available) to Our Clients, in connection with any matter discussed herein, whether now or in future, and under law, contract, equity, or otherwise, each of which are hereby expressly reserved.
c) The Corporate Debtor failed to respond to the notice. On 28/11/2019, the Applicant issued a notice to the Respondent to vacate the premises and handover the possession of the premises by 31/12/2019. The Respondent failed to reply to this notice.
d) On 05/01/2020, i.e. after the expiry of 31/12/2019 deadline, the Applicant issued another notice to the Respondent requiring him to confirm whether the licensed premises and related amenities were being used by the Respondent for the CIRP period. Relevant paras are extracted below: Dear Sir, Sub: Occupation of Office units, 301B, 302, 401 and 404 at Kaledonia, Ville Parle, Andheri Sahar Road, Andheri East, Mumbai (the licensed premises) Ref: (i) Leave and license agreement dated 24 February 2011 executed by Jet Airways (India) Limited (Jet Airways) and Mack Star Marketing Private Limited as amended and extended from time to time (the Leave and License Agreement); and
(ii) agreement dated 24 February 2011 executed by Jet Airways and Mack Star Marketing Private Limited (Mack Star) in respect of certain amenities and facilities as amended and extended from time to time (the amenities agreement) NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 5 of 13 We write on instructions from, and on behalf of our client, Mack Star, we refer to the Leave and License Agreement and Amenities Agreement (together, the Service Agreements). In this regard, we state as under:
6. Mack Stars services of providing office space and related amenities to Jet Airways for the period commencing on the Insolvency Commencement Date and terminating on the earlier of: (a) completion of CIR Process; or (b) termination of the service agreements by you (such period, the Relevant Period), contribute towards keeping Jet Airways as a going concern and any related costs incurred by Jet Airways fall squarely within the ambit of the definition of Insolvency Resolution Process costs enshrined in Section 5(13)(c) of the IBC (such costs, the IRP Costs)
7. Your conduct of continued acceptance of services under the service agreements for running an office of Jet Airways without any demur also indicates that you have accepted that the consideration for such services shall form a part of the IRP Costs.
8. In light of the foregoing, we request you, on behalf of Jet Airways, to confirm to us on or prior to 15 January 2019, that the monthly fees payable to Mack Star (along with the administrative fee prescribed for processing delayed payments) for the Relevant period shall: (a) form a part of the IRP Costs and attain priority over payments to any other creditor of Jet Airways; and (b) be paid once the proceeds under the resolution plan or under the liquidation process are distributed in terms of the IBC.
e) The Respondent did not respond to the above letter. Hence it is submitted that the license fee and amenities charges for the CIRP period should be treated as CIRP costs as contemplated under Section 5(13)(c) of the Code. Since the Respondent availed the services NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 6 of 13 without any demur and in defiance of the Applicants request to vacate the premises, the charges towards the same shall have to be treated as CIRP costs.
4. The Applicant further submits that it is the primary duty of the Respondent to preserve and protect the assets and continued business operations of the Corporate Debtor as mandated under Section 25(1) of the Code. Hence the Respondent is duty bound to honour the service agreements. More particularly when the Respondent has opted not to terminate the service agreements upon the commencement of CIRP, the service agreements continue to be in force.
5. The Applicant further submits that Section 5(13)(c) of the Code explicitly includes the cost incurred by the Respondent to keep the Corporate Debtor as a going concern as part of CIRP costs. Respondent not only continued to accept the services of the Applicant without any demur but also ignored the Applicants express request to vacate the licensed premises making it evident that the services availed during CIRP are essential for maintaining the Corporate Debtor as a going concern.
6. Despite the Applicants express request to vacate the licensed premises, the Respondent kept a part of the licensed premises under lock and key. The Respondents conduct evidences not only the unqualified acceptance of the services but also underscores the importance of the services to the Corporate Debtor during CIRP. Therefore, this cost should be included in the CIRP. By not doing so, Respondent is attempting to unjustly enrich the Corporate Debtor or its Creditors at the expense of the Applicant.
7. It is submitted that the Applicant had acted in a bona fide manner by providing services to the Respondent and therefore the Applicant ought not to be deprived of the legitimate consideration owed to it for the services. NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 7 of 13
8. It is submitted that the correspondence made by the Applicant shows that the Applicant did not intend to render pro gratis services to the Respondent after commencement of CIRP. The Applicant is entitled to payment of the consideration in priority as provided under Section 70 of the Contract Act, 1872 read with Section 53 of the Code.
9. The Respondent filed reply to the Application and pleaded as below.
a) Clause 19 of the Leave and License agreement provides as below: Events of default entitling the licensor to pre-determine the license: Notwithstanding any contained in this agreement, it is agreed that the following shall be treated as Events of Default whereby the licensor shall be entitled, though not obliged to, pre determine/terminate this agreement, at any time during the term of this agreement: [...] If the licensee defaults in and or delays payment of any amount on due dates payable under this agreement, save and except the events of default set out in sub clauses 19.3 and 19.4 above, the licensor shall for the purposes of pre-determining and terminating this agreement give a notice requiring the licensee to rectify and/or comply with the requirements of the notice within 30 (thirty) days of the receipt of such notice and in the event of licensee having failed to rectify or comply with the same within the said notice period, this agreement shall stand pre-determined / terminated without any further notice.
b) Clause 21 of the Leave and License agreement provides as below: [...] 21.3. In the event the licensor does not refund the security deposit (less deductions as set out in clause 21.2 hereinabove), the licensee shall be entitled to continue to occupy the licensed premises until receipt of the entire security deposit amount (less deductions as set out in clause 21.2 hereinabove) without payment of any further licensee fee during the period of occupation. Any such extended occupation by the licensee, shall not be treated as unauthorised or NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 8 of 13 illegal. Against receipt of such Security Deposit, the licensee shall ensure that vacant possession of the licenses premises is handed over and made available to the licensor.
10. It is submitted that on a conjoint reading of the above clauses, it would be clear that the agreements stood terminated and the Applicant was under an obligation to refund the security deposit. In case of failure to do so, the Corporate Debtor was entitled to continue the occupation of the licensed premises until the receipt of the entire security deposit without payment of any further licence fee during the period of occupation.
11. The Applicant on 30/04/2019 issued notice to the Corporate Debtor. In the notice the Applicant stated that despite being called upon to deposit the licence fee for the occupied premises in February, 2019, the Corporate Debtor failed to do so. The Applicant further called upon the Corporate Debtor to cure the breach of the agreement within 30 days thereof and invoked its right to terminate the agreement in case the breach was not cured within the period. The notice being in the nature of a notice for eviction, no further payments was to be made by the Corporate Debtor subsequent thereto. Clause 19.5 of the Leave and License Agreement provides that upon the Applicant issuing the eviction notice, and upon the Corporate Debtor failing to rectify default of non-payment within 30 days, the agreement would stand pre-determined or terminated without any further notice. The Corporate Debtor having failed to make the payment within the period the agreements stood automatically terminated on 31/05/2019. Thus no further licence fee was payable to the Applicant in terms of the clause 21 of the Agreement.
12. It is submitted that on 17/08/2019, a letter (extracted below) was sent to the Applicant by the Respondent, referring the termination of the agreement and sought refund of the security deposit furnished by the Corporate NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 9 of 13 Debtor. However, the Applicant failed to annex this letter to this Application. JET/RP/NCLT/19-20/092 17th August, 2019 Mack Star Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Dheeraj Apartment II, P.P. Dias Compound, Natwar Nagar, Road No. 1, Jogeshwari East, Mumbai 400 060 Dear Sir, Sub: Refund of Security Deposit given by Jet Airways (India) Ltd for the use of Licensed premises at Kaledonia, Village Vile Parle, Andheri Sahar Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai.
1. I am writing to you in the capacity of the Resolution Professional of Jet Airways (India) Limited hereinafter called as the Company.
2. I wish to inform you that the Company is currently undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Code) as directed vide order dated 20 June 2019 (Order attached as Annexure A) of the Honble National Company Law Tribunal at Mumbai (NCLT). Pursuant to this order, I have been appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional of the Company and subsequently appointed as the Resolution Professional by the Committee of Creditors at the first meeting of the Committee Creditors held on 16th July 2019.
3. Section 25(1) requires the Resolution Professional to preserve and protect the assets of the Corporate Debtor, including the continued business operations of the Corporate Debtor. In order to facilitate the Resolution Professional in the preservation and protection of the assets, section 25(2) (a) of the Code empowers the Resolution Professional to take the immediate custody and control of the assets of the Corporate Debtor.
4. While taking the custody and control of the assets of the Corporate Debtor, it has come to the notice of the undersigned that the License NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 10 of 13 Agreement in respect of the premises at Kaledonia, situated at village Vile Parle Andheri Sahar Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai, had been terminated by the Company prior to the Insolvency Commencement Date (ICD) and the Security Deposit of INR 3,29,61,490 (Three Crore Twenty Nine Lakh Sixty One Thousand Four Hundred Ninety) has not been refunded to the Company.
5. The company is entitled to receive the refundable Security Deposit (without any deductions) post termination of the leave and license agreement and you are hereby requested to credit the same to the below mentioned bank account of the Company within 3 days of receipt of this notice. Bank Account Details: Bank Name: State Bank of India Account No.: 36035234455 IFSC Code: SBIN0004791
6. Failure to make the payment within 3 days from the date of this notice shall be deemed to be non-cooperation and an obstruction to the CIRP under Section 19(2) of the Code and liable to be reported to the Honble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) for necessary directions, which may include fines, penalties and prosecution as well, the costs of which shall be solely borne by you.
7. Please also note that Indian law considers me as an officer of the court and any hindrance caused in the performance of my duties under the Code or in the conduct of the Insolvency Resolution Process of the Company will amount to contempt of court, which is liable to be reported to the Honble NCLT.
8. Should you have any query or clarification, you may write to me on the below mentioned address. Sincerely, Ashish Chhawchharia (IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00294/2017-18/10538) Resolution Professional for Jet Airways (India) Limited.
13. It is submitted that several telephone calls made to the Applicant subsequently requesting refund of the security deposit failed to evoke any NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 11 of 13 response from the Applicant. The Applicant on 28/11/2019, addressed a letter seeking vacation of the premises by 31/12/2019, disregarding the consequences of its own notice.
14. It is submitted that since the agreements stood terminated on account of notice, the question of utilizing the premises of the Corporate Debtor during the CIRP does not arise.
15. The Respondent, on 29/01/2020 in response to the letter of the Applicant dated 05/01/2020 sent a letter stating that: (a) The agreement stood terminated. (b) The Applicant was to refund the security deposit which it was refusing to do despite communication on going with the Respondents team (c) The Corporate Debtor was under no obligation to continue the agreement with the Applicant (d) There were no dues for the Applicant since the termination of the agreement. All debts due prior to the Admission Order could be claimed by filing a proof of claim.
16. Upon going through the pleadings and on hearing the counsel from either side the following are the observations of this Bench. (a) The Advocates notice dated 30/04/2019 issued by the Applicant addressed to the Corporate Debtor is an eviction notice wherein it was stated that the Corporate Debtor was called upon to deposit the licence fee for the premises and if the Corporate Debtor failed to do so within 30 days, the Applicant had the right to terminate the Leave and License Agreement and the Respondent was required to immediately vacate the premises. Even though it is stated that the Applicant has the right to terminate the agreement, by operation of Clause 19 of the agreement, on the expiry of 30 days from 30/04/2019, i.e. 31/05/2019 (admitted by both sides, it should however be 30/05/2019), the agreement NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 12 of 13 stood terminated. The Applicant required the Corporate Debtor to cure the breach of agreement within 30 days and invoked right to terminate the agreement in case the breach was not cured within that period. Admittedly the breach was not cured by the Corporate Debtor. Hence the Leave and Licence agreement stood terminated within 30 days from the period of notice i.e. with effect from 31/05/2019. (b) Clause 21.3 of the Leave and License agreement is clear that if the Applicant did not refund the security deposit, the Corporate Debtor would be entitled to continue to occupy the premises until receipt of the entire security amount without payment of any further license fee during the period of occupation. In view of this the Respondent was not required to hand over the possession till the security deposit was refunded and also need not to pay any license fee for the premises from 1st June, 2019. (c) The submission of the counsel for the Applicant that the Respondent used the premises while keeping the Corporate Debtor as a going concern and is duty bound to protect the Corporate Debtor etc. does not have any relevance, in view of the fact that the agreement stood terminated on 31st May, 2019. The submission that there is an agreement for service and the Corporate Debtor enjoyed the service etc. had to meet the same fate as Leave and Licence agreement itself was terminated. (d) The Applicant even though made elaborate pleadings, the letter dated 17/08/2019 written by the Respondent to the Applicant, was not enclosed to the Application (furnished in the reply). This letter makes it abundantly clear that the Respondent did not require the premises during the CIRP and the Applicants insistence on the factor that the RP could utilise the premise for NCLT, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT No. - I
I. A. No. 453/MB/2020 In C.P. (IB) No. 2205/MB/2019 Page 13 of 13 CIRP may not be helpful to the Applicant in aid of this Application. (e) The Applicant is not entitled to any payment with respect to the licence fee after 31st May, 2019. Since the security deposit is with the Applicant to ensure the payment of licence fee, the Applicant shall refund the security deposit to the Respondent after deducting the licence fee payable from 1st March 2019 to 31st May 2019. (f) On receipt of the balance security deposit, the Respondent shall, within 7 days, hand over the vacant possession of the premises to the Applicant. Sd/- Sd/-
V. Nallasenapathy Janab Mohammed Ajmal Member (Technical) Member (Judicial )
Edit Citation
Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Citation.
Get 2 points on providing a valid reason for the above change.
Add Equivalent Citation
Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment.
Select Preference
Share the Judgment
Are you sure?
By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us. Leave your message here.
Click here to remove this judgment from your profile.
To enjoy additional benefits
CONNECT WITH US
How viable could jet airways be, and what is the current aviation industry scenario.
Updated - November 28, 2021 09:50 am IST
Published - June 26, 2021 09:54 pm IST
FILE PHOTO: Jet Airways aircrafts are seen parked as an IndiGo Airlines aircraft prepares to land at the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport in Mumbai, India, April 18, 2019. REUTERS/Francis Mascarenhas/File Photo
The story so far: Two years after Jet Airways — at the time India’s second-largest full-service airline — halted operations in 2019 as it ran out of cash, the carrier has a real chance at getting airborne again. The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) this week approved a resolution plan from a consortium comprising UAE-based businessman Murari Lal Jalan and U.K.-based Kalrock Capital, clearing the decks for the airline’s takeover and a potential revival.
Against the claims totalling ₹15,432 crore that the resolution professional had admitted from operational and financial creditors, the Jalan-Kalrock consortium has offered to pay creditors, including banks, ₹1,183 crore over a five-year period.
Also read | Seven-member monitoring panel to manage Jet Airways under resolution plan
Of this, the first tranche of ₹280 crore would be paid in cash after 180 days of the new promoters taking ownership of the beleaguered airline. A second instalment of ₹195 crore would follow in 730 days. The balance would be paid through a mix of cash, proceeds generated from the sale of assets and from the cash flows generated by the airline annually.
Banks would also get a 9.5% stake in the airline, while the consortium would hold 89.79%. Employees would get to own 0.5% of the airline’s equity capital, while public shareholding would be at 0.21%.
Based on this offer, the Committee of Creditors, led by the State Bank of India, had voted the consortium as the winning bidder last October. “That the lenders agreed to such a massive clean-up is surprising and it can at best be termed as a face-saver,” said Kapil Kaul, CEO & Director, CAPA Advisory.
When Jet Airways halted operations in 2019, the government distributed its airport slots (the time-specific landing and take-off rights at various airports) among various other Indian carriers. At the time, the government had stated that the move was only “temporary” and that the airline’s new owners could get the slots back. However, the government has since reversed its position. It informed the NCLT that the slots could not be returned to the new owner of Jet Airways as other airlines had made investments in acquiring additional planes to bolster capacity and utilise the slots. The Jalan-Kalrock consortium has maintained that the offer to acquire the airline would be meaningless without the coveted time slots.
Also read | ‘Jet’s winning bidder cannot claim airline’s original slots’
The NCLT, in its oral ruling on June 22, did not address the issue in detail and just set a 90-day period for the consortium to work with the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation to resolve the matter and seek various regulatory approvals.
According to a senior government official privy to discussions between the Jalan-Kalrock consortium and airport operators, acquiring aiport slots will not be much of a hindrance.
“The Airports Authority of India has said that it does not have a problem in allotting new slots,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Delhi airport is willing to give 15 departure and 15 arrival slots and has said that more slots will become available after its fourth runway is ready. Mumbai airport, too, is willing to discuss the matter with the new owners. Availability of airport slots is a non-issue today as airlines are not able to operate flights on all the slots allotted to them because of a dip in travel demand,” the official added.
However, while obtaining a certain number of basic slots may not be a problem, the availability of premium slots, such as early morning departures out of Delhi and Mumbai, which Jet Airways had previously held, could end up being a thorny issue.
Resolution Professional Ashish Chhawchharia has said the airline could start flying by the end of this year. Before that, it will have to obtain various approvals and certifications, including an air operator’s permit, security clearances for the new owners, airworthiness of planes, permission to import planes, etc. The induction of pilots and their refresher training could take two to three months if the new owners rehire old employees. Similarly, cabin crew and engineers would also have to undergo refresher training.
The consortium will also need to hire a dedicated management team to run the airline and help it negotiate fresh contracts for the supply of a range of flight-related services, including fuel, catering and ground handling.
Jet Airways may face big challenges once it resumes operations, given the present state of the sector.
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a drastic fall in passenger demand. The number of domestic travellers shrank to 53 million in FY21 from 140 million in FY20. This forced airlines to ground 50%-70% of their fleet and fly half-empty planes, resulting in massive losses. The country’s largest airline, IndiGo, reported a decline in revenue from flights by almost 60% in financial year 2021.
CAPA has forecast total losses for Indian airlines over two years of the pandemic to be about $8 billion and has estimated that airlines would need almost $5 billion of capital infusion just to survive. In such an environment, a new player would need deep pockets.
Terms & conditions | Institutional Subscriber
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.
Jet Airways founder Naresh Goyal was arrested on Friday in a money-laundering case linked to an alleged bank fraud of Rs 538 crore at Canara Bank. The case stems from an FIR of the CBI registered on 3 May against Jet Airways, Goyal, his wife Anita and some former company executives
Fresh troubles are mounting for Jet Airways, India’s private airline as the Enforcement Directorate late Friday night arrested its founder Naresh Goyal in a money laundering case linked to an alleged bank fraud of Rs 538 crore at the Canara Bank.
He was taken into custody under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) following a long session of questioning at the central agency’s office in Mumbai, reported PTI .
The 74-year-old is expected to be produced before a special PMLA court in Mumbai on Saturday where the ED will seek his custodial remand, the news agency reported citing the officials.
Also read: DGCA ‘renews’ Jet Airways’ air operator certificate
The money laundering case stems from an FIR of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered on 3 May against Jet Airways, Goyal, his wife Anita and some former company executives in connection with the alleged Rs 538-crore fraud case at the Canara Bank.
The CBI FIR was registered on the bank’s complaint which alleged that it sanctioned credit limits and loans to Jet Airways (India) Ltd (JIL) to the tune of Rs 848.86 crore of which Rs 538.62 crore was outstanding.
Also read: Naresh Goyal’s personal ambition holds Jet Airways back from resurrection; is slow death awaiting India’s once favoured airline?
Raids and allegations
The CBI had said the account was declared “fraud” on 29 July 2021.
The bank alleged that the forensic audit of Jet Airways (India) Ltd (JIL) showed that it paid “related companies” Rs 1,410.41 crore out of total commission expenses, thus siphoning off funds from JIL.
The agency claims that the airline spent Rs 1,152.62 crore on professional and consulting costs between 1 April 2011 and 30 June 2019. Key managerial staff members are also allegedly related to these businesses, which have been identified as the source of suspicious transactions totalling Rs 197.57 crore.
According to the probe, Jet Airways paid 420.43 crore of the total 1,152.62 crore in professional and consultancy fees to organisations whose business nature did not correspond to the service descriptions on their invoices.
“As per sample agreement of JIL, it was noted that the expenses of General Selling Agents (GSA) was to be borne by GSA itself and not by JIL. However, it was observed that JIL has paid various expenses amounting to Rs 403.27 crore which is not in tune with the GSA,” the complaint now part of the CBI FIR alleged.
It added personal expenses such as salaries of staff, phone bills and vehicle expenses among others of the Goyal family were paid by JIL.
Among other allegations, it surfaced during the forensic audit that funds were also siphoned off through Jet Lite (India) Ltd (JLL) by way of making advance and investing and subsequently writing off of the same by making provision. JIL diverted the funds for subsidiary JLL in the form of loans and advances and investments extended.
Goyal was taken into custody on Friday following a long session of questioning at the ED’s office in Mumbai. The CBI conducted a raid on Jet Airways’ old offices and the founder’s residence on 5 May in relation to the Canara Bank fraud. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had carried out eight raids against Goyal and others involved in the case in July.
Also read: From cocaine money laundering to fake names: The long list of scandals at Credit Suisse
Another similar case
In February, another money laundering case against Goyal, linked to alleged cheating and forgery filed by Mumbai-based Akbar Travels, was quashed by the Bombay High Court after the Maharashtra Police filed a closure report stating it found no substance in the complaint and the dispute seemed to be civil in nature.
As this ED case was based on police FIR, and was the predicate offence for filing a money laundering case, it was declared quashed by the high court.
A division bench of justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan quashed the ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report or the ED equivalent of an FIR) registered on February 20, 2020, and all proceedings against Goyals on the ground of “being illegal and contrary” to law.
Goyal founded Jet Airways as a limited liability corporation in April 1992.
During the financial crisis in March 2019, he and his wife stepped down from the Jet Airways Board of Directors. In April same year, a severe cash shortage and growing debt forced the airline to discontinue operations.
In June 2021, following a protracted insolvency procedure, the airline was acquired by a partnership between tycoon Murari Lal Jalan of the UAE and London-based Kalrock Capital.
With inputs from PTI
Find us on YouTube
The jet case study: what exactly happens when an airline drowns.
(Catch all the Business News , Breaking News , Budget 2024 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times .)
Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.
After 30 years, why is Coca-Cola still a challenger brand in India?
Kalki a hit or not, PVR Inox needs to get these 4 things right to change fortunes
How an INR67 lakh stock fraud probe in Odisha busted Cambodia’s cyber-slave network
Vodafone Idea’s bold equity move sparks investor confidence amid criticism
India Cements in play: Will there be a rival for UltraTech?
Stock Radar: Indian Hotels rallies over 70% in 1 year to hit fresh record high; time to buy or book profits?
Find this comment offensive?
Choose your reason below and click on the Report button. This will alert our moderators to take action
Reason for reporting:
Your Reason has been Reported to the admin.
Log In/Connect with:
Will be displayed
Will not be displayed
Uh-oh this is an exclusive story available for selected readers only..
Worry not. You’re just a step away.
It seems like you're already an ETPrime member with
Login using your ET Prime credentials to enjoy all member benefits
Log out of your current logged-in account and log in again using your ET Prime credentials to enjoy all member benefits.
To read full story, subscribe to ET Prime
₹34 per week
Billed annually at ₹2499 ₹1749
Super Saver Sale - Flat 30% Off
On ET Prime Membership
Offer Exclusively For You
Save up to Rs. 700/-
ON ET PRIME MEMBERSHIP
Get 1 Year Free
With 1 and 2-Year ET prime membership
Get Flat 40% Off
Then ₹ 1749 for 1 year
ET Prime at ₹ 49 for 1 month
Monsoon Offer
Get flat 20% off on ETPrime
90 Days Prime access worth Rs999 unlocked for you
Exclusive Economic Times Stories, Editorials & Expert opinion across 20+ sectors
Stock analysis. Market Research. Industry Trends on 4000+ Stocks
Get 1 Year Complimentary Subscription of TOI+ worth Rs.799/-
Stories you might be interested in
COMMENTS
The Jet Airways case study is now so popular that it is mentioned in almost every Business School's curriculum due to the airline's unimaginable debacle. Founder Naresh Goyal has been investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and a large number of ex-employees have remained jobless after the airline shut down its operations in April 2019 ...
The Rise and Fall of Jet Airways : A Case Study Genesis of Jet Airways: History of Jet Airways: On the 1st of April 1992, Jet Airways was incorporated as an air taxi operator, starting commercial operations one year later, with a fleet of four Boeing 737-300 aircraft. In early January 1995, Jet Airways was granted its scheduled airline status ...
Issues and challenges of Indian Aviation industry: A case of Jet Airways. Review of Management, 9(3/4), 1557-1562. Google Scholar. Chatterjee D. (2018, November 17). ... & Mehta A. (2019). A case study on the downfall of kingfisher airlines. Journal of Management Research and Analysis, 6(2), 81-84. Crossref. Google Scholar. Phadnis A. (2018 ...
It was becoming increasingly difficult for Goyal to keep Jet Airways, the company he had nurtured like a baby, airborne.,The case can be taught in both online and offline modes of delivery in a 90-minute session. Post-covid, the delivery mode of classes has changed.
In 2010, where Jet Airways secure the highest market share and decent total revenue, it realized net losses. The case study also explains the need to adapt to the dynamics of the industry. After 2011, when LCC started dominating the Indian aviation industry, Jet Airways did not change its operation strategy and facing severe consequences.
Crisis Explained. As the deadline for the bids to buy Jet Airways looms, the $1.2 billion debt-stricken airline is likely to go down into the history books. At one time, Jet Airways was the biggest and arguably, the best airline in India. With the rapidly expanding aviation market and more Indians choosing air travel as their primary way of ...
Abstract. Jet Airways, a brainchild of visionary and excellent entrepreneur Naresh Goyal, incorporated in 1992, started taxi operations in 1993, began full operations by 1995 and got permission to fly international flights by aviation ministry to London in 2004. Naresh Goyal had vast experience in the field of aviation before entering the market.
Case overview/synopsis The Jet Airways, which once had the largest market share in the Indian aviation industry, has reached bankruptcy. ... The case study also explains the need to adapt to the ...
Abstract Case Intro 1 Case Intro 2 Excerpts Excerpts Financial Crisis Due to Rising Costs and Competition. Jet Airways purchased Air Sahara in 2007 to compete with Kingfisher and low-cost carriers like IndiGo, Air Deccan, and SpiceJet. It paid an exorbitant Rs 14.5 billion for the airline and rebranded it as 'JetLite'.. Auditors Raise Red Flag
The Rise And Fall Of Jet Airways. India's air travel market is a hyper-competitive environment at the best of times, even without the presence of a major global catastrophe. Last year, full-service carrier Jet Airways fell victim to this harsh environment and had to suspend its operations in the Spring of 2019.
The present case begins with the initiation of 'corporate insolvency proceedings' against Jet Airways and concludes with the final approval of the resolution plan for its revival by the NCLT. It spans three different Court orders over a period of two years. Company Petition No. 2205 (IB)/MB/2019 in NCLT, Mumbai Bench
The case study discusses the rise and fall of Jet Airways (India) Limited, a major airline in India. It helps students understand the various warning signals which, if read properly, would have made it apparent that the company was financially unviable. The case also helps to evaluate the various reorganization strategies. Issues
Jet Airways, which started off as an air taxi operator in 1993 and became a scheduled carrier in 1995, has been under insolvency for two years after it shut operations in April 2019 under a heavy debt. Jet Airways is the first Indian carrier/airline to undergo insolvency proceedings under the Cross Border Insolvency Protocol along with the ...
So, in this case study, we'll learn about Jet Airways and the SWOT Analysis of Jet Airways. So, Let's get started. About Jet Airways. Jet Airways Ltd. is an Indian airline headquartered in Mumbai. It was established as a private company on April 1, 1992. It was founded by Naresh Goyal, a London-based businessman.
This video covers the journey of Jet Airways from start to bankruptcy and its crisis. It was run by Naresh Goyal and reason of its failure.Subscribe To Our C...
Jet Airways (A): Weathering Turbulence. Jet Airways (A) is the case of a formerly rapidly growing, highly successful Indian airline that is now faced with the need to reduce expenses, namely in the form of salary cost reductions. The case provides a background on Jet Airways, including its history, strategy and competitive advantage.
Jet Airways. 1. This is an Application filed under Section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) seeking the following reliefs: a) Declare that the monthly fees payable to the Applicant under the service agreements for the relevant period shall form part of the IRP Costs in terms of the IBC;
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a drastic fall in passenger demand. The number of domestic travellers shrank to 53 million in FY21 from 140 million in FY20. This forced airlines to ground 50 ...
Jet Airways Case Study (Why Jet Airways was failure, what are the issue behind this) Name: Divya Gaba. Student Id: 33459988. Strategies for Growth and Excellence (MBS 664)
Jet Airways founder Naresh Goyal was arrested on Friday in a money-laundering case linked to an alleged bank fraud of Rs 538 crore at Canara Bank. The case stems from an FIR of the CBI registered on 3 May against Jet Airways, Goyal, his wife Anita and some former company executives. Fresh troubles are mounting for Jet Airways, India's private ...
Jet owes Rs 8,500 crore to lenders. Potential investors are now asking them to take an up to 80 per cent haircut on the debt. It means even if the lenders find a suitable buyer, they will probably take a huge hit. It queers the pitch for the banks' plan to recover some of the debt by selling the airline.