A maritime claim for shipping management services and payments made to vendors on behalf of vessel owners constitutes a valid ground for the arrest of the vessel under the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017.

and Admiralty Suit No. 30 of 2025, respectively and thus is within the territorial waters of the jurisdiction of this Court.

3. It is contended that the Plaintiff has an irrefutable claim in respect of the Defendant Vessel. It was further submitted that if the arrest orders are not passed against the Defendant Vessel in favour of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s maritime claim will be rendered infructuous as distribution of sale proceeds of the Defendant Vessel realized by way of auction of the Defendant Vessel will be distributed amongst the various stakeholders, whose claims have already been lodged with this Court in aforementioned Admiralty Proceedings against the Defendant Vessel. It was thus contended that in such eventuality, the Plaintiff will have no recourse whatsoever to recover the amounts due to it and its security will be lost forever rendering the entire proceedings infructuous.

4. Mr. Vyas, learned Senior Advocate further submitted that in view of the above the Plaintiff has a maritime claim falling under 4(1)(l) as well as under Section 4(1)(m) of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 in relation to the services rendered and the payments made by the Plaintiff in relation the Defendant Vessel pursuant to the Standard Shipping Management Agreement dated 10.10.2024 executed by the owners of the Defendant Vessel with the Plaintiff. The present Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the amounts due and payable by the Defendant Vessel and her owners, more particularly set out in the particulars of Claim filed by the Plaintiff and as prayed for in the present Suit in view of the fact that the Defendant Vessel is presently at Port and Harbour of Alang, Bhavnagar and is under the order of arrest passed by this Court, which is within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court and inter alia prayed for arrest of the Defendant Vessel.

5. It was also contented by Mr. Vyas, learned Senior Advocate for the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff was approached on behalf of the Defendant Vessel to provide various shipping management services in relation to the Defendant Vessel. Basis the said inquiry, eventually a Standard Ship Management Agreement dated 10.10.2024 (At Annexure – A5 -Page 39 to 63) came to be executed between the Plaintiff and Starline Express Shipping, the owners of the Defendant Vessel and it was decided to pay the annual management fees of USD 182,500 per month to the Plaintiff in addition to the payment of predelivery management fees of USD 10,000 to the Plaintiff. It was further contended that pursuant to the entering into the aforesaid Management Agreement and considering that the Defendant Vessel was facing serious financial troubles in paying its vendors and also was not able to pay its wages to the crews and procure bunkers and other essentials for carrying out operations, the Plaintiff, under the instructions and assurance from the owners of the Defendant Vessel that the amount paid by the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant Vessel, will be re-paid to the Plaintiff and also in terms of Clause 12 and 13 of the Standard Ship Management Agreement dated 10.10.2024, made various payments to various vendors on behalf of the Defendant Vessel aggregating to approximately USD 8,01,665. Copies of all the payment advice issued by various banks of the Plaintiff as well as the payment receipts issued by various vendors and all the material evidencing payment made by the Plaintiff qua the Defendant Vessel are produced by the Plaintiff at Anne