The High Court of Kerala, has held in Chembolaparambu General Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. M.V. KAVARATHI1 that what is contemplated under Admiralty Jurisdiction of a High Court in India is only with regard to the arrest of a foreign ship which happens to be in Indian waters. When it is confined to a foreign ship which happens to be in Indian waters, any ship owned by the President of India or the Union of India, or by a Indian company incorporated or situated in India or by a partnership firm in India or even by a Citizen in India cannot be arrested by invoking the admiralty jurisdiction or any High Courts in India.
The Court was considering the prayer of the plaintiff in Admiralty Suit No. 4 of 2014, Chembolaparambu General Engineers, who had filed an interlocutory application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an order of arrest of M.V. KAVARATHI, a vessel owned by an Indian and represented by her master, which was within the waters of India/Cochin port and to keep the vessel under safe arrest until further orders of the Court. The case of the plaintiff was that it had carried out repairs/engineering works on the vessel, M.V. KAVARATHI, and out of a total sum of Rs. 82,87,508.45/- due towards the cost of the said works done, the owner of M.V. KAVARATHI had made only a part payment of Rs.26,55,615/- and that despite several demands througn notices, the owner of the vessel had not cared to settle the liability. It was in this context that the plaintiff had preferred the application seeking arrest of the said vessel till the obtaining of sufficient security for the plaint claim. The claim of the plaintiff was resisted by the owner of the vessel on the ground that the provisions regarding arrest of a vessel do not extend to the arrest of an Indian ship by an admiralty court of India.
Justice B. Kemal Pasha accepted the contention of the defendants and relying on the ratio formulated by the Apex Court in M.V. Elisabeth & Ors. v. Harwan Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd.., etc2 held that the presence of a foreign ship in Indian waters is a condition precedent for invoking the admiralty jurisdiction of a High Court in India and that it is evident that arrest of such a ship can be made only when it is a foreign ship, and further, when it happened to be in Indian waters.
The Court accordingly dismissed the said interlocutory application, and also ordered return of the plaint under Order VII R.10 C.P.C. to be presented to the Court in which the suit ought to have been instituted, as the Court held, in an application filed by the first defendant seeking rejection of the plaint, that the questions involved in the suit were questions which arise from a contract for repair works of an Indian ship by the plaintiff which does not involve any jurisdiction for the arrest of such an Indian ship and that the suit is merely an ordinary money suit which is triable by an ordinary civil court competent to try it.
___________
1. 2014 (4) KLT 246
2. AIR 1993 SC 1014
No comments:
Post a Comment