K.R.SHRIRAM
MV Amoy Fortune – Appellant
Versus
Mv Amoy Fortune – Respondent
JUDGMENT
K.R.Shriram, J -Plaintiff has approached this Court seeking a decree against defendant vessel as an unpaid supplier of bunkers to the defendant vessel. Pursuant to an order dated 16th March 2017, defendant vessel came to be arrested. Defendant furnished bail in the form of Bank Guarantee to secure plaintiff''s claim in this suit.
2. Fortune Marine Lines Limited (applicant), as owners of defendant vessel has taken out the present notice of motion for vacating the order of arrest of defendant vessel and for return of security. It is the case of applicant that there is no privity of contract between plaintiff and applicant and no cause of action or liability in personam against applicant which is essential for maintaining an action in rem against defendant vessel.
3. Shri Pratap for applicant submitted as under :
(a) The issues that arise in this application are covered by a judgment of a Learned Single Judge of this Hon''ble Court in the case of Gulf Petrochem Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. M.T. VALOR, 2015 SCCOnlineBom 1367 . The facts are more or less identical. The case of applicant herein stands on a much better footing than the case of applicant in M.T. VALOR .
(b) Plaintiff does
Crescent Petroleum Ltd. Vs. m.v. Monchegorsk
Dental Council of India Vs. Mr. Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal Hingoli and Ors
Mayer (HK) Ltd. Vs. Owners of Parties, m.v. Fortune Express and Ors
Raj Shipping Agencies Vs. m.v. Bunga Mas Tiga and Anr
S.P.Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) by LRs. Vs. Jagannath and Ors
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.