Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 3]

Bombay High Court

Polygreen Inernational Dmcc vs Mt Pamboor 2 (Imo-9914852) And Anr on 1 April, 2022

Author: N. J. Jamadar

Bench: N. J. Jamadar

                                         COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC

                                                                    Santosh
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
      ADMIRALTY AND VICE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION
                  IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION


               JUDGES ORDER NO. 23 OF 2022
                           IN
          COMM ADMIRALTY SUIT (L) NO. 10641 OF 2022

Polygreen International DMCC                                ...Plaintiff
                      Versus
MT Pamboor 2 (IMO:9914852)                             ...Defendant


Mr. Aditya Krishnamurthy, a/w Pulkit Dhawan, i/b Bose &
     Mitra & Co., for the Plaintiff.


                           CORAM:         N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                           DATED :        1st APRIL, 2022
Order:-

1.   This suit seeks urgent relief of the arrest of defendant no.1

vessel MT PAMBOOR 2 (IMO:9914852), an oil product tanker

ship, registered as a River Sea Vessel (Type-II) at the port of

Mumbai, under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, together with

her hull, tackle, engines, gears, plant, machinery, articles,

things,    apparel,   equipment,    paraphernalia    and      all    other

appurtenances, presently at the Port and Harbour of Mumbai,

within the territorial waters of the India, in view of the maritime

claim of the plaintiff in the sum of US$ 1,416,293 for the salvage

services rendered by the plaintiff.


                                   1/6
                                        COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC

2.    A Judges Order is taken out by the plaintiff for an urgent

order of arrest.

3.    It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant no.2 Shiny

Shipping and Logistics Private Limited ("Shiny Shipping") a

company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, is the

registered owner of defendant no.1 MT PAMBOOR 2. Defendant

no.2 Shiny Shipping, is a 100% holding company of M/s. Tresta

Trading Ltd. ("Tresta Trading") a Mauritius based company. The

said M/s. Tresta Trading owns MT Tresta Star bearing IMO

No.9869629 ("MT Tresta Star").

4.    MV Tresta Star ran aground on 3rd February, 2022 during

Tropical Cyclone Batsiri and a salvage agreement was executed

in Lloyd's Standard Form of Salvage Agreement to salvage the

vessel Tresta. The plaintiff rendered the services and bill in the

sum of US$ 1,391,261.48 million was raised.            A notice was

issued to the Solicitors of the defendants on 31 st March, 2022.

The plaintiff is, thus, constrained to institute this suit for

maritime claim in the sum of US$ 1,416,293 along with interest

at the rate of 4.5% p.a. If defendant no.1 vessel sails out of the

territorial waters of India, the plaintiff would be left in the lurch.

Hence this motion for urgent order of arrest of defendant no.1.




                                 2/6
                                         COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC

5.   I have heard Mr. Krishnamurthy, the learned Counsel for

the plaintiff. Perused the material on record.

6.   The claim of the plaintiff that the plaintiff had rendered

salvage services to Tresta Star finds prima facie support in the

Preliminary   Refloating   Plan    (Exhibit-J)   and   the   Salvage

Agreement (Exhibit-G) executed between the plaintiff and Tresta

Trading Ltd. The plaintiff has placed on record daily progress

reports at Exhibit-I-1 to I-14, which lend prima facie credence to

the claim of the plaintiff. Under Clause (i) of sub-section (1) of

Section 4 of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of

Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 ("the Admiralty Act, 2017"), salvage

services constitute a maritime claim.

7.   The question which warrants consideration is the jural

relationship between defendant no.2 and Tresta to which the

salvage services were rendered.         The learned Counsel for the

plaintiff submitted that the fact that Tresta Star is owned by

Tresta Trading Ltd. is substantiated by the Equasis - Ship

Folder (Exhibit-F), which indicates that Tresta Trading Ltd. is

the registered owner of the said ship. The learned Counsel

further banked upon a statement containing 'salient features of

the financial statement of subsidiaries/associate companies/

joint ventures' (Annexure-I Form AOC-I) furnished under


                                  3/6
                                         COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC

Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014, to lend support to the

submission that defendant no.2 holds 100% shares of Tresta

Trading Ltd. This statement, prima facie, show that defendant

no.2 holds 100% shares in its subsidiary, Tresta Trading Ltd.

8.    Under Section 5(2) of the Admiralty Act, 2017, the court

may also order arrest of any other vessel for the purpose of

providing security against a maritime claim, in lieu of the vessel

against which a maritime claim has been made under the Act.

9.    The Registry has confirmed that no caveat against the

arrest of defendant no.1 is entered in the Caveat Register.

10.   In the light of the aforesaid facts, I am satisfied that a

prima facie case for arrest of defendant no.1 vessel is made out.

11.   Hence, the following order:

                               :ORDER :

(i) I order the arrest of defendant no.1 Vessel MT PAMBOOR 2 (IMO:9914852) lying and being with Admiralty Jurisdiction of this Court along with her hull, tackle, engines, gears, plant, machinery, articles, things, apparel, equipment, paraphernalia and all other appurtenances, presently at the Port and Harbour of Mumbai.

4/6

COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC

(ii) The undertaking of the plaintiff dated 1st April, 2022, is accepted.

(iii) The Judge's Order for arrest of defendant no.1 vessel is signed separately.

(iv) The undertaking of plaintiff's advocate that the warrant of arrest will be served upon the vessel within a period of two weeks from today by e-mail or fax or hand delivery is accepted.

(v) After service of warrant of arrest, if the arrested vessel is not released by furnishing security or bail amount within 45 days, or an application for vacating 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 plaintiff, the office of Sheriff of Mumbai shall present a Sheriff's report for auctioning the vessel within seven days from the date of receiving communication from plaintiff's advocate or from the date of knowledge of abandonment of vessel.

(vi) Plaintiff is at liberty to forward a copy of the communication from the Sheriff of Mumbai 5/6 COMASL10641-22AWJO23-22.DOC forwarding this order by fax / e-mail / hand delivery / RPAD to all the concerned Authorities.

(vii) All parties are directed to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the concerned SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Associate of this Court.

Digitally signed by

SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Date: 2022.04.01 20:20:46 +0530

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 6/6