Amendments to a plaint are not permissible if they fundamentally alter the character of the suit and the cause of action, thereby ousting the jurisdiction of the court.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.) :

1. This is an application for deletion of name of the defendant no.1 M.V. Fazah-1 (the vessel) and for amendment of the plaint. This suit was instituted in the Admiralty Jurisdiction of this Court inter alia seeking arrest of the defendant no.1 vessel and a decree for Rs.13,96,10,000/-against the defendants jointly and severally.

2. The defendant no.2 is a company incorporated under foreign laws having its registered office at Cyprus. The defendant no.3 is a company inter alia engaged in providing logistic support.

3. Briefly, the plaintiff had in or about 2020, purchased an ammonia shell converter (the cargo) for commission at its plant at Jagdhispur, Uttar Pradesh. The expeditious delivery of the cargo was of paramount importance to the ongoing business activities of the plaintiff. Thereafter, in order to transport the cargo from Italy to India, the defendant no.3 in response to a request had submitted an offline bid and the same was accepted by the plaintiff. Subsequently, a work order dated 6 April, 2021 for transportation of the cargo was issued in favour of the defendant no.3.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid, the vessel was booked for ocean carriage of the plaintiff’s cargo from Italy to India. On 24 May, 2021, a bill of lading was issued in favour of the plaintiff. The vessel was to deliver the cargo in June, 2021. However, after substantial delay, the vessel ultimately docked at Haldia on 10 September, 2021. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff had entered into a settlement with the defendant no.1, whereby the plaintiff undertook not to pursue any claim against the owners and parties interested in the defendant vessel and to take steps for striking off the name of the defendant vessel from the array of the parties to this suit.

5. By this application, the plaintiff seeks to delete the name of the defendant no.1 and amend its claim insofar as the defendant nos.2 and 3 are concerned. The amendments proposed by the plaintiff seek to convert the suit to an action simpliciter in personam for damages against the defendant nos.2 and 3. The allegations against the original defendant no.1 have been deleted and reliance has been placed on a charterparty agreement. A case of negligence is now sought to be made out against the defendant no.3. The monetary claim against the defendant nos.2 and 3 have also increased.

6. On behalf of the plaintiff it is contended that, the amendments sought for do not alter the fundamental character of the suit. The proposed amendments only bring on record certain subsequent events and make suitable amendments in support of their claim against the defendant nos.2 and 3. It is further contended that the cause of action against the defendant nos.2 and 3 was in personam and such claim is maintainable under the provisions of The Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 (the Act). It is also contended that all the documents sought to be relied on by the plaintiff have been found subsequent to the filing of the suit. In support of their contentions, the plaintiff relies on the decisions in Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal vs. K.K. Modi 2006 SCC OnLine SC 320, Sampath Kumar vs. Ayyakannu (2002) 7 SCC 559, Nitya Naraya Sarkar vs. Anandamoyee Dikpati 1998 SCC OnLine Cal 229 and Sudhir Kumar @ S. Baliaya vs. Vinay Kumar G.B. 2021 SCC OnLine SC 723.

7. On behalf of the defendant no.3, it is contended that the amendments sought for alter the nature and character of the suit and are impermissible. In particular, after deletion of the name of the defendant no.1, the proposed amendment ousts the Admiralty Jurisdiction of this Court. It is further contended that in view of sections 2(f), 4 and 7 of the Act, the amendments substantially change the nature of the cause of action. In such circumstances, in the absence of the defendant vessel being a party to the proceeding, the claim of the plaintiff loses its character of a maritime claim against the vessel