IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIRAL R.MEHTA
Five Element Industry Limited – Appellant
Versus
MV Honcho (IMO 9602978) – Respondent
ORDER :
Niral R. Mehta, J.
1. Heard Learned Advocate Mr. Ishan Joshi for the Plaintiff.
2. Learned Advocate Mr. Ishan Joshi for the Plaintiff has placed reliance on the averments made in the plaint and submitted that the Plaintiff had entered into a Tripartite Agreement dated 14.10.2025 with one Eastmed Ship Holdings Inc., which was the Second Disponent Owner of the Defendant Vessel and with AUM Commodities FZCO, which was the Charterer and Cargo Owner, for the shipment of the Steam Coal in Bulk from Puerto Bolivar Port, Colombia to Fujairah Port, United Arab Emirates.
3. Learned Advocate Ms. Joshi further submitted that under the Tripartite Agreement, the Plaintiff had agreed to finance the freight charges amounting to USD 2 Million per vessel for three vessels namely, MV Honcho, MV Kuai Bang Hai 18 and MV Capricon Honour. As per Clause 3 of the Tripartite Agreement, the aforesaid amount was to be repaid to the Plaintiff within 90 days period in five equal installments along with interest as specified in the said clause. The payment was to be made directly to the Plaintiff by the Disponent Owner – Eastmed Ship Holdings Inc. in accordance with Clause 4 of the Tripartite Agreement. 4. L
The court reinforced that non-compliance with maritime contract terms grants the claimant the right to secure an arrest of the vessel to recover losses incurred due to breach.
The court held that a maritime claim under the Admiralty Act justifies the arrest of a vessel to secure a buyer's interests in case of the seller's breach of agreement.
The supply of bunkers constitutes a maritime claim enforceable in rem under the Admiralty Act, justifying the arrest of the vessel for non-payment.
The Plaintiff established a prima facie maritime claim for total loss of cargo, warranting arrest of the Defendant Vessel under the Admiralty Act, 2017.
The court affirmed that a maritime claim exists against a vessel when contractual obligations are not met, allowing for the arrest of the vessel to secure the claim.
The court affirmed the Plaintiff's right to arrest the Defendant vessel based on maritime claim provisions, affirming that contractual breaches and associated sanctions justified immediate action.
The court established that a maritime claim for lost cargo under the Admiralty Act justifies vessel arrest, with jurisdiction confirmed as the vessel is present within the territorial waters.
The court upheld maritime law providing for vessel arrest to secure claims arising from misdelivery of cargo without original Bills of Lading, establishing the defendants' liability for financial los....
A breach of contract in maritime agreements may support claims for damages and penalties under the Admiralty Act 2017, classifying such disputes as maritime claims.
The court affirmed the validity of maritime liens for opportunity loss charges and granted a warrant for the arrest of the vessel to secure claims pending indemnity.
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.