S.1 Short title, application and commencement

       (1) This Act may be called the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017.
       (2) It shall apply to every vessel, irrespective of the place of residence or domicile of the owner:
       Provided that this Act shall not apply to an inland vessel defined in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Inland Vessels Act, 1917, (1 of 1917) or a vessel under construction that has not been launched unless it is notified by the Central Government to be a vessel for the purposes of this Act:
       Provided further that this Act shall not apply to a warship, naval auxiliary or other vessel owned or operated by the Central or a State Government and used for any non-commercial purpose, and, shall also not apply to a foreign vessel which is used for any non-commercial purpose as may be not

S.2 Definitions

       (1) In this Act,- (a) "admiralty jurisdiction" means the jurisdiction exercisable by a High Court under section 3, in respect of maritime claims specified under this Act;
       (b) "admiralty proceeding" means any proceeding before a High Court, exercising admiralty jurisdiction;
       (c) "arrest" means detention or restriction for removal of a vessel by order of a High Court to secure a maritime claim including seizure of a vessel in execution or satisfaction of a judgment or order;
       (d) "goods" means any property including live animals, containers, pallets or such other articles of transport or packaging or luggage irrespective of the fact whether such property is carried, on or under the deck of a vessel;
       (e) "High Court", in relation to an admiralty proceed

S.3 Admiralty jurisdiction

       Subject to the provisions of sections 4 and 5, the jurisdiction in respect of all maritime claims under this Act shall vest in the respective High Courts and be exercisable over the waters up to and including the territorial waters of their respective jurisdictions in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act:
       Provided that the Central Government may, by notification, extend the jurisdiction of the High Court up to the limit as defined in section 2 of the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976, (80 of 1976).

S.4 Maritime claim

       (1) The High Court may exercise jurisdiction to hear and determine any question on a maritime claim, against any vessel, arising out of any-
       (a) dispute regarding the possession or ownership of a vessel or the ownership of any share therein;
       (b) dispute between the co-owners of a vessel as to the employment or earnings of the vessel;
       (c) mortgage or a charge of the same nature on a vessel;
       (d) loss or damage caused by the operation of a vessel;
       (e) loss of life or personal injury occurring whether on land or on water, in direct connection with the operation of a vessel;
       (f) loss or damage to or in connection with any goods;
     &nbs

S.5 Arrest of vessel in rem

       The High Court may order arrest of any vessel which is within its jurisdiction for the purpose of providing security against a maritime claim which is the subject of an admiralty proceeding, where the court has reason to believe that-
       (a) the person who owned the vessel at the time when the maritime claim arose is liable for the claim and is the owner of the vessel when the arrest is effected; or
       (b) the demise charterer of the vessel at the time when the maritime claim arose is liable for the claim and is the demise charterer or the owner of the vessel when the arrest is effected; or
       (c) the claim is based on a mortgage or a charge of the similar nature on the vessel; or
       (d) the claim relates to the ownership or possession of the vessel; or
&nbs

Legal Comments on Section 5 of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017

Introduction

Section 5 of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 ("Admiralty Act") deals with the arrest of vessels within the admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court. It is a critical provision that codifies the circumstances under which a vessel can be arrested to provide security for a maritime claim. The section distinguishes between the arrest of the vessel in respect of which a claim has arisen and the arrest of other vessels owned or controlled by the same owner or charterer.

What Section 5 Says

Section 5(1) empowers the High Court to order the arrest of any vessel within its jurisdiction for the purpose of providing security against a maritime claim, provided the court has reason to believe that:- (a) the person who owned the vessel at the time when the maritime claim arose is liable for the claim and is the owner of the vessel when the arrest is effected; or- (b) the demise charterer of the vessel at the time when the maritime claim arose is liable for the claim and is the demise charterer or owner of the vessel when the arrest is effected; or- (c) any other person who, at the time when the maritime claim arose, was in possession or control of the vessel is liable for the claim and is in possession or control of the vessel when the arrest is effected.

Section 5(2) further permits the arrest of any other vessel for the purpose of providing security against a maritime claim, in lieu of the vessel against which the claim has been made, subject to the provisions of subsection (1).

Essential Ingredients

• Maritime claim: A claim arising out of a maritime transaction or occurrence.
• Vessel within jurisdiction: The vessel must be within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court exercising admiralty jurisdiction.
• Liable party: The person liable for the maritime claim must be the owner, demise charterer, or person in possession/control of the vessel at the relevant times.
• Purpose of arrest: The arrest must be for the purpose of providing security against the maritime claim.
• Court's reason to believe: The High Court must have reason to believe that the conditions under sub-section (1) are met.

Scope of Section 5

• Section 5(1) is wider than Article 3(1) of the 1999 Arrest Convention, as it permits arrest of any vessel owned or controlled by the liable party, not merely the vessel in respect of which the claim arose.
• Section 5(2) provides an alternative remedy to arrest a sister vessel or any other vessel owned or controlled by the liable party, in lieu of the offending vessel.
• The provision applies to both in rem and in personam claims, as long as a maritime claim is involved.
• The arrest can be ordered even if the vessel is not the one directly involved in the maritime transaction, provided the ownership or control conditions are satisfied.
• Coexistence of arbitration proceedings and admiralty action in rem is permissible; the invocation of arbitration does not invalidate the arrest.

Punishment for Section 5

There is no specific punishment prescribed under Section 5 itself. However, the provision enables the court to order the arrest, detention, and sale of the vessel to secure the maritime claim. Non-compliance with court orders may attract contempt proceedings.

Legal Comments

• Arrest of vessel in rem - The High Court may order arrest of any vessel within its jurisdiction to provide security against a maritime claim, provided the liable party is the owner, demise charterer, or person in control of the vessel at the relevant times. - [Source: , Section 5(1)]

• Arrest of sister vessel - Section 5(2) permits arrest of any other vessel owned or controlled by the liable party, in lieu of the vessel against which the maritime claim has been made, subject to the conditions of subsection (1). - [Source: , Section 5(2)]

• Wider scope than 1999 Arrest Convention - Unlike Article 3(1) of the 1999 Arrest Convention, Section 5(1) of the Admiralty Act, 2017 does not require the maritime claim to arise "in respect of" the vessel sought to be arrested; it permits arrest of any vessel owned or controlled by the liable party. - [Source: P. S. Marine (A Unit of Seaman Multi Trading Pvt. Ltd. ) VS M. V. Altus Exertus (IMO 7909463) - 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 133]

• No requirement of concluded contract - A maritime claim under Section 4(1)(g) or 4(1)(h) requires a concluded contract; mere negotiations or a "clean recap" email without a formal charterparty does not give rise to a maritime claim warranting arrest. - [Source: Navigation Key INC VS M. V. Manticore - 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 167]

• Coexistence of arbitration and arrest - An action in rem against a vessel under Section 5 can coexist with arbitration proceedings; the invocation of arbitration does not bar the court from exercising its admiralty jurisdiction to arrest the vessel. - [Source: OSV Crest Mercury 1 (IMO 9724398) VS Vision Projects Technologies Pvt Ltd - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 1088, Paras 1, 13, 16, 27]

• Distinct from action in personam - The court clarified that an action in rem against a vessel is distinct from an action in personam against its owners; arrest of the vessel is permissible even when arbitration is invoked by the owners. - [Source: OSV Crest Mercury 1 (IMO 9724398) VS Vision Projects Technologies Pvt Ltd - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 1088, Paras 12, 16]

• Admiralty jurisdiction prevails over CPC - The provisions of the Admiralty Act take precedence over the Code of Civil Procedure; the absence of notice due to a caveat under Section 148A of the CPC does not invalidate the arrest. - [Source: OSV Crest Mercury 1 (IMO 9724398) VS Vision Projects Technologies Pvt Ltd - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 1088, Paras 20, 22]

• Power of arrest under Section 5 - The powers of arrest are set out in Section 5 of the Admiralty Act, 2017; a party who cannot maintain an admiralty action in rem under Section 9 can still secure its claim in arbitration under Section 5(2). - [Source: Siem Offshore Redri AS VS Altus Uber - 2018 0 Supreme(Bom) 1263]

• Section 5(2) is subject to Section 5(1) - The arrest of any other vessel under Section 5(2) is clearly subject to the conditions of Section 5(1); the court must be satisfied that the liable party is the owner or controller of the vessel sought to be arrested. - [Source: P. S. Marine (A Unit of Seaman Multi Trading Pvt. Ltd. ) VS M. V. Altus Exertus (IMO 7909463) - 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 133]

• No embargo on arresting sister vessel - There is no statutory embargo prohibiting a court from arresting a sister vessel when the offending vessel is available; such a prohibition must be specific and cannot be implied. - [Source: P. S. Marine (A Unit of Seaman Multi Trading Pvt. Ltd. ) VS M. V. Altus Exertus (IMO 7909463) - 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 133]

• Proviso to Section 5(1) of IGST Act - The proviso to Section 5(1) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with the Customs Act, confers exclusive jurisdiction upon customs authorities to assess and collect tax on imported goods. - [Source: Avanti Feeds Limited vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax - 2026 0 Supreme(AP) 1207, Para 13]

• Double taxation impermissible - The principle that taxation of supply of services, even after the cost of services had already been taxed, is not permissible; double taxation on the same transaction is impermissible. - [Source: Sembcorp Energy India Limited vs Union of India - 2025 0 Supreme(AP) 208, Paras 26, 27]

• Limitation Act, Section 5 - Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, allows for condonation of delay if sufficient cause is shown; the court may allow delay for appealing or applying for review if reasonable grounds are presented. - [Source: Navin Kumar Pramanik VS Union of India - 2017 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1568, Mithu Lal Bairwa VS Geelu Balai - 2018 0 Supreme(Raj) 1166]

• Waiver of right to challenge disciplinary proceedings - Intentional waiver of the right to challenge the initiation of disciplinary proceedings cannot be reopened at a belated stage; the appellant is estopped from reagitating the plea. - [Source: HIMANI MALHOTRA VS INDRAPRASTHA COLLEGE FOR WOMEN - 2018 0 Supreme(Del) 1150]

• GST Council decision prevails - The decision of the GST Council regarding GST rates is final and cannot be challenged based on other statements or responses; the court dismissed the petition for want of merit. - [Source: Manufacturers Traders Association VS Union of India - 2020 0 Supreme(Del) 1093]

• Maternity benefits for contractual employees - The Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017, extends benefits to all working women, including contractual employees; benefits accrue even post-contract termination if conditions of the Act are met. - [Source: Rehmat Fatima VS State of NCT of Delhi Through Principal Secretary - 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 5406, Paras 5, 38, 57]

• Section 5 of Seeds Act - The notification dated 18.09.2017 under Section 5 of the Seeds Act, restricting the seeds production of Basmati varieties of rice to specific areas, was not challenged on merit by the court. - [Source: State Government of Madhya Pradesh VS Union of India - 2019 0 Supreme(Del) 682, Para 46]

• Delegation of powers under Section 5 of State GST Act - The Commissioner of State Tax is empowered to delegate his powers under Section 5(3) of the State GST Act to subordinate officers; however, the subjective satisfaction for provisional attachment under Section 83 must be based on credible material. - [Source: Enprocon Enterprise Ltd. VS Assistant Commissioner of State Tax - 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 167, Paras 20-42]

• Admiralty Act's supremacy - In admiralty jurisdiction matters, the Admiralty Act, 2017, prevails over other procedural laws; the court examined the scope of the Act specifically its application to maritime claims against vessels. - [Source: OSV Crest Mercury 1 (IMO 9724398) VS Vision Projects Technologies Pvt Ltd - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 1088, P. S. Marine (A Unit of Seaman Multi Trading Pvt. Ltd. ) VS M. V. Altus Exertus (IMO 7909463) - 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 133]

S.6 Admiralty jurisdiction in personam

Subject to section 7, the High Court may exercise admiralty jurisdiction by action in personam in respect of any maritime claim referred to in clauses (a) to (w) of sub-section (1) of section 4.

S.7 Restrictions on actions in personam in certain cases

       (1) Where any maritime claim arising in respect of a damage or loss of life or personal injury arising out of any-
       (i) collision between vessels,
       (ii) the carrying out of or omission to carry out, a manoeuvre in the case of one or more vessels,
       (iii) non-compliance, on the part of one or more vessels, with the collision regulations made in pursuance of section 285 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, (44 of 1958) the High Court shall not entertain any action under this section against any defendant unless-
       (a) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises in India; or
       (b) the defendant, at the time of commencement of the action by the High Court, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or

S.8 Vesting of rights on sale of vessels

On the sale of a vessel under this Act by the High Court in exercise of its admiralty jurisdiction, the vessel shall vest in the purchaser free from all encumbrances, liens, attachments, registered mortgages and charges of the same nature on the vessel.

S.9 Inter se priority on maritime lien

       (1) Every maritime lien shall have the following order of inter se priority, namely:-
       (a) claims for wages and other sums due to the master, officers and other members of the vessel's complement in respect of their employment on the vessel, including costs of repatriation and social insurance contributions payable on their behalf;
       (b) claims in respect of loss of life or personal injury occurring, whether on land or on water, in direct connection with the operation of the vessel;
       (c) claims for reward for salvage services including special compensation relating thereto;
       (d) claims for port, canal, and other waterway dues and pilotage dues and any other statutory dues related to the vessel;
       (e) claims base

S.10 Order of priority of maritime claims

       (1) The order of maritime claims determining the inter se priority in an admiralty proceeding shall be as follows:-
       (a) a claim on the vessel where there is a maritime lien;
       (b) registered mortgages and charges of same nature on the vessel;
       (c) all other claims.
       (2) The following principles shall apply in determining the priority of claims inter se-
       (a) if there are more claims than one in any single category of priority, they shall rank equally;
       (b) claims for various salvages shall rank in inverse order of time when the claims thereto accrue.

S.11 Protection of owner, demise charterer, manager or operator or crew of vessel arrested

       (1) The High Court may, as a condition of arrest of a vessel, or for permitting an arrest already effected to be maintained, impose upon the claimant who seeks to arrest or who has procured the arrest of the vessel, an obligation to provide an unconditional undertaking to pay such sums of money as damages or such security of a kind for an amount and upon such terms as may be determined by the High Court, for any loss or damage which may be incurred by the defendant as a result of the arrest, and for which the claimant may be found liable, including but not restricted to the following, namely:- (a) the arrest having been wrongful or unjustified; or
       (b) excessive security having been demanded and provided.
       (2) Where pursuant to sub-section (1), the person providing the security may at any time, apply to the High Court to have the security

S.12 Application of Code of Civil Procedure

The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 shall apply in all the proceedings before the High Court in so far as they are not inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder.

S.13 Assistance of assessors

       (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Central Government shall appoint by notification, a list of assessors with such qualifications and experience in admiralty and maritime matters, the nature of duties to be performed by them, the fees to be paid to them and other ancillary or incidental matters for the purposes of this Act, in the manner as may be prescribed.
       (2) The appointment of assessors shall not be construed as a bar to the examination of
       expert witnesses by any of the parties in any admiralty proceeding.

S.14 Appeal

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from any judgment, decree or final order or interim order of a single Judge of the High Court under this Act to a Division Bench of the High Court.

S.15 Transfer of proceedings by Supreme Court

       The Supreme Court may on an application of any party, transfer, at any stage, any admiralty proceeding from one High Court to any other High Court and the latter High Court shall proceed to try, hear and determine the matter from the stage at which it stood at the time of transfer:
       Provided that no such proceeding shall be transferred unless parties to the proceeding have been given an opportunity of being heard in the matter.

S.16 Power to make rules

       (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act.
       (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, the rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:-
       (a) the qualification, experience, nature of duties and fee to be paid to the assessors and other ancillary or incidental matters under sub-section (1) of section 13;
       (b) the practice and procedure of admiralty jurisdiction under this Act including fees, costs and expenses in such proceedings; and
       (c) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed.
       (3) Until rules are made under sub-section (2) by the Central Go

S.17 Repeal and savings

       (1) The application in India of the following enactments are hereby repealed-
       (a) the Admiralty Court Act, 1840;
       (b) the Admiralty Court Act, 1861;
       (c) the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act, 1890;
       (d) the Colonial Courts of Admiralty (India) Act, 1891; and
       (e) the provisions of the Letters Patent, 1865 in so far as they apply to the admiralty jurisdiction of the Bombay, Calcutta and Madras High Courts.
       (2) Notwithstanding the repeal, all admiralty proceedings pending in any High Court immediately before the commencement of this Act shall continue to be adjudicated by such court in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
      

S.18 Power to remove difficulties

       (1) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government may, by order published in the Official Gazette, make such provisions, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act as may appear to it to be necessary for removing the difficulty:
       Provided that no such order shall be made after the expiry of a period of three years from the date of commencement of this Act.
       (2) Every order made under this section shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament.