JUDGMENT - BATTA R.K., J.:---Petitioner No. 1 M/s. Maini Shipping (Pvt.) Limited, was owner of an Inland Vessel known as "M.V. Nitya Gita" which was sold by the said petitioner No. 1 by Sale Deed dated 13th January, 1989 to petitioner No. 2 M/s. I.K. Marine Charterers. After sale of the said vessel, petitioner No. 2 renamed the said vessel as "I.K. Annamaria". Petitioner No. 1 addressed a letter to the Secretary Industries, Government of Goa, Panaji, informing him that it had sold the barge 'M.V. Nitya Gita' renamed 'I.K. Annamaria' to petitioner No. 2 and that permission for transfer of ownership be granted. The petitioner also submitted an application for transfer of ownership to the Registering Authority along with the declaration for the purposes of effecting transfer in favour of petitioner No. 2. Thereafter the attention of the Registering Authority was drawn by Shri Ivan Khan, partner of petitioner No. 2 that Writ Petition No. 445/1988 has been disposed of by the Panaji Bench of the Bombay High Court and that all port dues payable in respect of the said vessel had been paid. The petitioners then wrote letter dated 13th April, 1992 to the Captain of Ports (respondent No. 1) enclosing Demand Draft for Rs. 3,784 towards port dues payable by the petitioner and requested that ownership of the vessel be transferred to petitioner No. 2. On 7th May, 1992, petitioners received a letter from the Registering Authority (respondent No. 2) informing them that they should comply with the requirements of Rule 9 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Inland Steam Vessels Registration Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the said Rules) and that permission of the State Government and/or Central Government should be obtained for transfer of the ownership of the vessel in terms of sub-section (1) of section 19-M of the Inland Vessel Act, 1917 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and thereafter to apply for transfer.

2. The petitioners, feeling aggrieved by the said order of the Registering Authority, has approached this Court for directions to respondent No. 3 to grant permission to effect the transfer of ownership of the vessel "I.K. Annamaria" in favour of petitioner No. 2 and/or in the alternative further directions to respondent No. 2 to register the vessel in the name of petitioner No. 2. The petitioner also sought directions to take outside the State of Goa and for further directions to respondent No. 1 to give all necessary certificates within four days of the Order of the Court pending hearing and final disposal of this petition. Certain orders were passed from time to time in pursuance of the interim directions sought and the petitioners were permitted to take the vessel outside the State of Goa upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs and getting the vessel insured in the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs and assigning the Policy in favour of the Additional Registrar of this Court. By this interim order further condition was imposed on the petitioners that they should give an undertaking to the Court, that the petitioners shall bring back the vessel in question without raising any objections whatsoever within one month from passing of the order to that effect.

3. The grounds on which the petitioners have based their challenge are two fold. Firstly, that the petitioner No. 1 was functioning in Goa at the time of transfer and petitioner No. 2 had business premises in Goa which facts were not taken into consideration by respondent No. 2 while returning the Form of Transfer of registration on account of which he had acted without jurisdiction. It appears that the stand of the petitioners is that permission was not required since both the petitioner had been functioning in Goa and, as such, permission was not required. The second ground is that even though the petitioners had sought permission from the Secretary Industries for transfer of the ownership of the vessel, respondent No. 3 had not taken any action in the matter.

4. Learned Advo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document