Kerala High Court
2 vs Owners And Parties Interested In ... on 11 January, 2021
rN TEE HIGE COURT OE' KERJAIIA AT ERNAKIUI,${
PREgEriflF
TEE EONOT'RABLE MR. dIUSTTCE DEIIAI{ RAIdACEA}IDRAT,I
!q!O!{DAY, THE l1TH DAY oF JA}IUARY 2a2L / ztru PoUsEA, Lg42
Achl . S. .No . { Or 2018
PI,ATNTTFFS:
EDMN.A,
AGED 43 YE.ARS
s/o ARocKm, RAJ,RESIDD{6 Ar .ll[BrY?ilr rs, RFDnNEEttR[,r,
VILAVAIICODE,KAIiIYAKI MARI, TAII{IL NADU, G29 193.
BY ADVS.
sRr .v..f .I'IATEEII (SR. )
SRI.VIPIIE P.VARGflggE
SRE.}lt}iAP€g !4Elgggg
SRI . DITiTTTE K.I4AI{OEAR
SI'fT. DEAN:TA T MALI,AR
DEEENDAI{TS:
1 O{NERS AIID PARTIES INTERESTED TN TEE \ZESSEL }NT SCT
MUMBAT
(TMO 9419539} AI{D HER S&{ERS AND/OR I.IA}IAGERS AISD/OR
!4ASTER ATiID ALL OTEER PERSONS CONCERNED TIITERESrED TN
EER'A l:IgDreN Er.,Ac vEssEL TocgrEER lErE EER Ettf,x,
?*CKE E / E!€=!+Eg' €Ej**g' P=,*ieP, !*€EEifERts, eRPEci,Eg, EE=res
APPAREL, EQUTPMEIIT, sToREs AI.ID OTEER PARAPEERNALTA oD{
BOARD, AT PRESEI{T LYrNc rN THE PORT AND nARBouR oF
COCETN PORT IN IIIDINN TERRITORII3 lIATERS AI{D
REPRESE}ITED BY EER, }4.STER,.
2 THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR,
cocErN poRT TRusT,ttlrsr.ewo,cocErN_592 oo3.
BY SRT.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP, SC
TETS ADMIRJALTY SUIT EAVING BEEN EINALLY SEJARD ON 11.01 .2O2L,
THE cottRT oN THE SAME DAY DELr\ZERED THE For.,LottrNG:
ACm]..S..No.4 OF 20Le
2
JUDGMENT
when this Suit was called today, the learned counsel for
the
parties ate ad idem lhat the disputes between their
clients have
been setiled under the aegis of the Ernakulam Mediation
Centre,
Ernakulam. They pointed out that a Memorandum of joint
settlement has also been placed on record.
2. I have examined the Memorandum referred above and
notice that it has been signed by the parties, as also by their
learned counsel; and therefore, see no reason why it cannot be
accepted.
In the afore circumstances, accepting the joint settlement
between the parties, I close this suit without any further orders;
thus directing the parties to act impticitly in terms of the said
settlement.
Needless to say, since the matter has been settled through
Mediation, the plaintiff will not be liable to make payment of the
court Fee, even though they were allowed to sue as indigenf
going by the mandate of Section 69 of the Kerala Court Fees and
Suits Valuation Act, i.g5g.
SD/.
DE'YAN RAMACHANDRAN
rp JUDGE
O BEF.RE THE H.N.URABLE HIGH C'URT oF
KERALAAT ERNAKULAM
(Admiralty Jurisdiction)
Admiralty Suit No. 4 of.2lll
Edewn.A and others Plaintiff
Vs.
Owners and Parties Interested in the Defendants
Vessel MV SCI MUMBAI (IMO 9419539)
and Another
REPORT SUBMITTED BYTHE MEDIATOR
ADV. RAZIYA P.A.
Mediated, matter is settled.
Terms and conditions are attached herewith.
Dated this the 26h day of November,2020..
oV ./
>//
Adv. Raziya P.A.
Mediator
Ernakulam Mediation Centre
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Admiralty Suit No. 4 of 2018
Edwin. A : Plaintiff
-Vs-
Owners and Parties Interested in the
Vessel MV SCI MUMBAI (IMO 9419539)
&Anr : Defendants
JOINT SETTLEMENT MEMO SUBMITTED BY THE PLNNTIFF AND
DEFENDANT No.l
o
VIPIN P.VARGHESE
V.J MATHETII & CO
COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
&
JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
CALLIDUS LEGAL
COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT NO.1
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
(Admiralty Jurisdictionf
Admiralty Suit No. 4 of 2OI8
Edwin. A Plaintiff
-Vs-
Owners and Parties Interested in the
Vessel MV SCI MUMBAI ( IMO 94L95391
& Anr Defendants
JOINT SETTLEMENT MEMO SUBMITTED BY THT PLAINTIFF ATTD
DEFENDANT No.l
1. The above suit has been filed by the Plaintiff claiming compensation from
Defendant No.I on account of the injuries sustained to the Plaintiff due to the
alleged incident of collision between the vessel MT Desh Shakti and the fishing boat
"Oceanic".
2. The Parties, after discussions and deliberations have decided to settle the
suit claim of the Plaintiff against the Defendant No.1, out of court, with the Plaintiff
accepting adequate monetar5r compensation to his complete satisfaction from the
Defendant No.1 towards the full and final satisfaction of all his claims in respect of
o the above suit and incident.
3. The settlement reached between the parties is purely on humanitarian
grounds and arising out of sympathy towards the present conditions of the Plaintiff
and without admitting to any liability as to the incident or quantum as alleged in
the above suit. Further, the Plaintiff hereby agrees that he has received the ex-
gratia compensation from the Defendant No.1 as full and final setflement towards
any and all past, present and future claims in respect of the subject matter.
4. In the above circumstances, the Plaintiff hereby withdraws the above suit
unconditionally making clear that his claim against the Defendant No.1 stands
fully satisfied and discharged and that he shall not have any claim whatsoever
against the Defendant No.1 hereafter in connection with the subject matter of the
suit.
gt qrftq rt{6T ft.rqfr.
/) EDwi ru FoTTHE SHtPPf$c c0Rp0RATl0N 0F tilD'A UD.
INr*v
Kerara o*
q.Rkdn!ff1p. v. Kd€nr
I,.r1T:_111
Hi:w- cnqdq6(n,{ qd @ / Generat itanager (p&S}
5. The Plaintiff hereby submits that he has no objection in the Honble Court
releasing the security furnished by the Defendant No.1 back to them.
n eDw irv Dated this the 18th dav of October 2019.
liNt*'.
PLAINTIFF *ffi,ffi6F...*
Fditfi 'ni6niirbn'or rNDIA LID'
""Ti't't
fl'ED'"J'N/
EL FOR THE PLAINTIFF COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT No.1
s.v . (. t^a r(,1 . ) lbr
W*[email protected]/'4"-
a
and Conciliation Centr!
Kerala State Mediaticn
Hiqh Co';rl c'i4eieii Jfu
r,13s i.:i - arij2 | "r
;
