Meeres Master Systems Private ... vs M.V. Ocean Amethyst (Imo 9561227) ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10797 Bom

                                                          501-COMASL-29248-23.doc

Sharayu Khot.
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                COMMERCIAL ADMIRALTY SUIT (L) NO. 29248 OF 2023
                                          WITH
                         JUDGE'S ORDER (L) NO. 29249 OF 2023

      Meeres Master Systems Private Limited                   ...Plaintiff

                Versus

      M.V. Ocean Amethyst (IMO 9561227)
      and Anr.                                                ...Defendants

                                         ----------
      Mr. Manoj Khatri a/w. Arnab Ghosh for the Plaintiff.
                                         ----------

                                         CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA J

                                          DATE        : 18 October 2023

      ORDER :

1. Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board.

2. The above Suit, along with Judge's Order, has been moved ex-

parte after the circulation was granted. The urgent relief

sought is the arrest of the Defendant No.1 Vessel as there is an

apprehension that Defendant No.2, the owner of Defendant

No.1 vessel may sell the vessel. According to the Plaintiff, it

501-COMASL-29248-23.doc

has an irrefutable claim against the Defendant No.1 Vessel. If

the Defendant No.1 Vessel is sold, the present proceedings

will be rendered infructuous.

3. Coming to the brief facts, the present suit is for judgment and

decree against the Defendant No.1 Vessel and the arrest,

sequestration, condemnation and sale of the Defendant No.1

Vessel for securing and/or satisfying the Plaintiff's aggregate

claim of Rs. 64,96,329.32 (Rupees Sixty-Four Lakhs Ninety

Six Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Nine and Paise Thirty

Two Only). The Plaintiff has also claimed interest calculated

at the rate of 18 % per annum from the date of filing of the

suit till payment and/ or realization as per the particulars of

claim (Exhibit-G). The claim in the Suit arises out of supplies

made and services rendered to Defendant No.1 Vessel as well

as her sister vessels. The supplies and services were rendered

to the faith and credit of the Defendant Nos. 2 and 3. All the

vessels have used and/or benefited from the said supplies

made and services rendered by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has,

however, been only partly paid in respect of the same. The

present Suit is to recover the unpaid amounts for which the

501-COMASL-29248-23.doc

present suit is filed and the above Judge's Order has been

taken out for arrest of the Defendant No.1 Vessel.

4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Plaintiff and also considered the averments made in the

Plaint. Perusing the Plaint and the annexures a prima facie

case for arrest of the Defendant No.1 Vessel is made out. In

the present case, prima facie, the claim in the Plaint is a

maritime claim as defined in section 4(l) of the Admiralty

(Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017.

The Plaintiff is entitled to move against Defendant No. 1

Vessel under Section 5(2) of the aforesaid Act.

5. In these circumstances, I find there is no doubt that there is a

cause of action in favour of the Plaintiff and that the

Defendant No.1 Vessel being at Mumbai port is within the

admiralty jurisdiction of this Court. The Plaintiff has made out

an ample prima facie case. The balance of convenience lies

with the Plaintiff to whom, in my view, almost irreversible

prejudice would be caused if reliefs were to be denied.

501-COMASL-29248-23.doc

6. Advocate for the Plaintiff states that the Registry has

produced the Caveat Register, and there is no valid caveat

against arrest with respect to the Defendant No.1 Vessel.

7. Accordingly, I order and direct the arrest of the Defendant

No.1 Vessel, along with her hull, engines, gears, tackles,

bunkers machinery, apparel, plant, furniture, fixtures,

appurtenances and paraphernalia, plant and machinery at

present at Mumbai port until the satisfaction of the Plaintiff's

claim.

8. I have seen the Judge's Order and it seems to me to be in the

proper form and with the appropriate contents. I accept the

undertakings contained in the Judge's Order as undertakings

to the Court. I therefore make an order in terms of the Judge's

Order in the facts and circumstances of the present case and is

signed separately.

9. The Plaintiff is at liberty to forward a copy of the

communication from the office of the Sheriff of Mumbai along

with a copy of this order by Fax/email/hand delivery/ RPAD

501-COMASL-29248-23.doc

to the Port and Customs authorities.

10. After service of this Order of arrest, if the arrested vessel is

not released by furnishing security or bail amount within

eight (8) weeks of service, or an application for vacating the

order of arrest is not filed, or the vessel is found abandoned

by the person in-charge of the vessel or owner, or is found

unmanned, then, in such an event, on an application being

made by the plaintiff, the office of the Sheriff of Mumbai shall

present a Sheriff's report for auctioning the vessel within

fourteen (14) days from the date of receiving communication

from the Plaintiff's advocate or from the date of knowledge of

abandonment of vessel.

11. The Plaintiff prays for the Warrant of arrest of the Defendant

No. 1 Vessel to be dispensed with. The said request is

accepted.

12. All parties to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

[R.I. CHAGLA J.]