IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
D.K. SINGH, J.
GAC Shipping (India) Private Limited, Represented By Its Manager (Operations) M.G Sajinath – Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By Its Secretary and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No. 1992 Of 2021
Decided On : 10-04-2025
(A) Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 - Sections 47A, 48, 49, 50, and 111 - Tariff Policy for Major Port Trusts, 2018 - Anchorage charges - Petitioner challenged invoices for anchorage charges issued by Cochin Port Trust after vessels were allowed to sail with a final bill endorsement - Court found that the charges were not applicable as the vessels were not berthed at designated port berths - The amendment to levy anchorage charges was deemed substantive, not clarificatory, and could not be applied retrospectively. (Paras 6 .1, 22, 24)
(B) Retrospective application of amendments - The court ruled that amendments introducing new charges cannot be applied retrospectively unless explicitly stated - The principle lex prospicit non respicit was upheld, indicating that laws should not apply to past events. (Paras 23 , 24 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a streamer agent, paid various vessel-related charges for three foreign vessels at Cochin Port, later challenged additional anchorage charges imposed by Cochin Port Trust based on a Trade Circular.
Findings of Court:
The invoices for anchorage charges were set aside as the vessels did not fall under the applicable categories for such charges.
Issues: Whether the amendment to levy anchorage charges was clarificatory or substantive, and if it could be applied retrospectively.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the amendment was substantive and could not be applied retrospectively, affirming that new liabilities cannot be imposed retroactively.
Result: Writ petition allowed; invoices for anchorage charges set aside.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr P Deepak learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms Sneha Rajiv learned for the petitioner, and Mr Daya Sindhu Sreehari learned Central Government Counsel, Ms T.C. Krishna learned DSGI and Mr Poulose C Abraham learned Counsel for the Cochin Port Trust.
Facts
2. The petitioner is a streamer agent for foreign vessels calling at the major ports in the Country including Cochin Port. During the months of April and May 2020, three foreign vessels, namely MT DELTS SKY, MT DHT FALCON and MT EVRIDIKI, were called at the Cochin Port under the petitioner’s agency. The invoices dated 13.04.2020, 05.05.2020, and 21.05.2020 were raised by the Cochin Port Trust (CoPT) for various vessel-related charges, including port dues, towage, pilotage etc. The amount demanded under the three invoices was remitted in full by the petitioner, and the vessels were allowed to sail after the following endorsement made in the three invoices, namely-
"No final bill against this VCN. This may be treated as final bill"
2. Later, three invoices dated 04.07.2020 were served on the petitioner demanding "anchorage charges" in respect of the three vessels in question. The anchorage charges were raised on the strength of the Trade Circular issued by the Chairman, CoPT, dated 04.07.2020. The circular dated 04.07.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent would read as follows:
“Prevent the anchorage charges are being levied by the Port as per раrа 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 of Scale of Rates of CoPT.
As approved by Chairman, it has been decided to collect anchorage charges as detailed below with effect from 11.03.2020 on ad-hoc basis:
i) For the vessels calling at Cochin Port and have been allotted non-Port berths or Port berths with no berth hire charges, anchorage charges will be levied as per para 2.3.4 of the Scale of Rates.
ii) In the case of the vessels which have been shifted from berth to anchorage and further sailed from anchorage, the anchorage charges will be levied on the last berth where the vessel was berthed as per para 2.3.3 of the Scale of Rates. If the last berth is a non-Port berth or berth with no berth hire charges, then the anchorage charges shall be levied as per para 2.3.4 of Scale of Rates.
iii) In case the vessel is shifted from berth to anchorage and then back to berth, then the anchorage charges (post shifting from berth to anchorage) will be levied as per para 2.3.3 of the Scale of Rates applicable to the berth to which the vessel is shifted from anchorage. In the case of vessel shifting to a non-Port berth or a Port berth with no berth hire charges, the anchorage charges as per para 2.3.4 of the Scale of Rates will be applicable.
The above ad-hoc charges are subject to approval of the Tariff Authority for Major Ports.”
The three invoices dated 04.07.2020 are under challenge in this writ petition.
3. In compliance with the policy direction issued by the Government of India, the Ministry of Shipping (MoS) under Section 111 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, (for short, ‘MPT Act’) the Tariff Authority for Major Ports (TAMP) notified the “Tariff Policy for the Major Port Trust, 2018”, which was published in the Official Gazette on 16.01.2019. The said Tariff Policy came into effect from the date of its issue, i.e., 26.12.2018. Taking into consideration the comments and suggestions received from Major Port Trusts during the consultation process, the Policy for Determination of Tariff for the Major Port Trusts, 2015, issued by the Ministry of Shipping dated 30.01.2015 was modified and the new Tariff Policy for Major Port Trusts, 2018, was issued.
3.1 Clause 1.3 of the Tariff Policy for Major Port Trusts, 2018, provides that the policy would come into effect from the date of issue and would be applicable for the determination of tariff in major Ports due for revision with effect from 01.04.2019. It shall remain in force till01.04.2022 unless reviewed earlier or extended by the Government. 4. Section 47A of the MPT Act envisaged the constitution and incorporation o
Amendments introducing new charges cannot be applied retrospectively unless explicitly stated; substantive amendments must operate prospectively.
Charges for anchorage of the vessel after the date of bill of sale and delivery of its possession unto the purchaser were not in the nature of an encumbrance and were to be borne by the purchaser. Po....
Governmental directives cannot impede the contractual rights of private entities concerning detention and demurrage charges during lockdown, as per established legal and regulatory frameworks.
Handling charges for manganese ore require prior sanction from the Central Government under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, and changes to existing rates must be substantiated by proper governmental....
Statutory liens held by dock authorities cannot be extinguished by court action without consent; priority of claims must be upheld.
Section 111 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, the Board of Trustees of any Major Port is bound by the directions on questions of policy issued by the Central Government in writing from time to time....
A conjoint reading of Regulations 10(1)(l) and 10(1)(m) makes it abundantly clear that the 2018 Regulations are fully binding on the shipping line and it is not open to the latter relying on a contra....
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.