SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Guj) 142

D.A.MEHTA
FLOATING SERVICES LTD – Appellant
Versus
MV "san FRANSCECO DIPALOLA" – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.S.VAKIL, M.J.THAKUR, PRATAP, R.J.OZA

D. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS suit has been presented by the plaintiff seeking arrest of defendant No. 1-Vessel i. e. M. V. "san FRANSCECO DI PAOLA" in the following circumstances :

( 2 ) THE case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff, a Limited Company, incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom and having its address as stated in the cause title, is the owner of defendant No. 1-Vessel. It is stated that the said vessel was purchased by the plaintiff from one Audrey Ventures Company on 27. 6. 2000. That thereafter the plaintiff entered into a Memorandum of Agreement dated 01. 07. 2003 with defendant No. 2 for sale of vessel for a consideration of US$ 4,00,000 and defendant No. 2 paid 10% of the said consideration. The expected time of delivery of the vessel was 07. 07. 2003. However, according to the plaintiff, as defendant No. 2 had not paid the entire balance consideration, no delivery was given by the plaintiff. It is further averred that defendant No. 1 - vessel was laid up at the port/harbour of Oostende Port, Belgium since 27. 06. 2000 and hence, there was no crew on board. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant No. 2 clandestinely removed the vessel from the closed basi






















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top