Whether it is the decision to purchase or lease aircraft for Nepal, there are few instances that have not been mired in controversy. Most decisions to procure aircraft—whether by the former Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation or Nepal Airlines Corporation—have ended up embroiled in disputes. Examples such as Lauda and Widebody have come under investigation, ranging from issues of aircraft quality and financial irregularities to matters involving ticket-selling agents.

An agreement related to leasing an aircraft, connected to an incident nearly 28 years ago, also became controversial in a similar manner. The former Royal Nepal Airlines had signed a lease agreement with the American company Chase Air for a 124-seat Boeing. The agreement to lease the aircraft was made as part of a strategy to attract foreign tourists, keeping in mind Visit Nepal Year 1998. However, not only did the aircraft fail to arrive on schedule, but the credibility of the agreement itself was called into question. When an agreement was made to lease an aircraft from a company that did not even own one, the management committee of Royal Nepal Airlines initiated an investigation into its own decision.

The decision of Royal Nepal Airlines came under scrutiny after it signed an agreement with a company that did not own any aircraft and the plane failed to arrive on the scheduled date. On one hand, the aircraft did not arrive on time; on the other, the agreement was made with a company that did not possess an aircraft, which led to suspicions of financial irregularities involving the responsible officials and management. For this reason, the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Representatives was the first to request documents related to the leasing decision process and launch an investigation. The agreement stipulated that the aircraft should arrive in Kathmandu on Kartik 6, 2055 BS. But the aircraft never arrived.

The incident did not end there. The practice of management changes following government changes, coupled with the weak agreement made by the airline, rendered the service of Nepali aircraft internationally unreliable. After the aircraft failed to arrive, management informed that a replacement aircraft would be provided. But that too never materialized. When the aircraft did not arrive on schedule, Nepal had to cancel its scheduled flights to Delhi and Europe. This had a negative impact on tourist arrivals and departures. The lease cost for the aircraft, crew expenses, maintenance, and insurance were set at $2,850 per flight hour. However, when the aircraft did not arrive on time, passengers who had already purchased tickets were left stranded. This resulted in losses amounting to millions for the corporation.

Officials from the corporation themselves stated that this situation arose because political influence was too dominant in the management. The agreement with Chase Air was for a six-month lease. However, after the plan to bring the aircraft became controversial, the Public Accounts Committee under the House of Representatives requested documents and began an investigation.

After two years of preparations to purchase an aircraft, when management failed to bring one, efforts were made to uncover the reality. Proposals were requested from 10 companies for the lease. But after rejecting all other proposals, the agreement was made with the American company Chase, which then came under suspicion. Once it was revealed that the agreement had been made with a company that did not own any aircraft, many issues came under scrutiny. After questions were raised about the agreement, the Ministry of Finance also launched an investigation.

The aircraft that Nepal was supposed to bring was leased by Chase from Ryan Air in the United States, and Ryan had leased it from a joint company called Star and Palm Beach Aviation. That joint company had arranged to lease the Boeing from another company called AJJ Aircraft Sales and Leasing, based in Ireland. As the aircraft was being sold through three layers before reaching Nepal, it became almost certain that the aircraft would not arrive.

Because the lease agreement was made with a company that did not own any aircraft, not only did Nepal's tourism industry suffer, but there were also losses amounting to hundreds of millions of rupees. Questions were raised not only about the management of Royal Nepal Airlines but also about the political sphere. Using the issue of leasing the aircraft and the negligence involved as context, Kantipur published news reports under various headlines for a week in Kartik 2055 BS. On Kartik 10, 2055 BS, Kantipur published a report titled "Agreement to Bring Aircraft from a Company That Did Not Own Any Aircraft."