In its judgement the High Court said that the resolution professional (RP) appointed under the insolvency law to manage the airline has not been able to show any urgency or grave imminent threat to led the aircraft to fly maintenance flights without any prior notice.

The orders for the Go First airlines to maintain the status quo in respect of handling non-revenue flights of the petitioner lessor’s aircraft till further orders. Earlier, Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju had directed to maintain the status quo till August 3.

The high court termed as “misconceived” the contention of the RP that 2 of the 10 aircraft have been flown by Go Airlines as these were handling flights forming part of the scheduled maintenance activity for an aircraft.

“The respondent no.9/ RP of Go Airlines has also not been able to show any urgency or any grave imminent threat to these aircraft to suddenly and without any prior notice, compel the respondent no.9 RP to fly these aircraft.

“Prima facie, the term – scheduled maintenance cannot be understood to include flying the aircraft even if it is a non-commercial flight. Thus, respondent no.9/ RP of Go Airlines cannot be permitted at this stage, to continue with these handling/maintenance flights,” Justice Ganju said, reported PTI.

The recent action by the High Court was taken after the application filed by SMBC Aviation Capital Limited, one of the lessors of aircraft. SMBC Aviation Capital had submitted that disregarding the earlier directions of the court, the RP has flown 2 aircraft owned by the petitioners without court’s permission.

Updated: 04 Aug 2023, 07:55 AM IST