S.1 Short title and extent

       (1) This Act may be called the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925.
       (2) It extends to 1[the whole of India].
       ---------------------------
              1. Subs. by the A.O. 1950.
       --------------------------

S.2 Application of rules

       Subject to the provisions of this Act, the rules set out in the Schedule (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”) shall have effect in relation to and in connection with the carriage of goods by sea in ships carrying foods from any port in 1[India] to any other port whether in or outside 1[India].
       --------------------------
              1. Subs. by the A.O. 1950.
       --------------------------

S.3 Absolute warranty of seaworthiness not to be implied in contracts to which rules apply

       There shall not be implied in any contract for the carriage of goods by sea to which the rules apply any absolute undertaking by the carrier of the goods to provide a seaworthy ship.

Legal Comments

• "Scope" - Section 3 (3) and related provisions in the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 establish the liability framework for carriers, including the concept that liability can be extinguished after the one-year limitation (subject to extensions by agreement) and that certain waivers or clauses in bills of lading interact with Hague/Hague-Visby rules. [Villavarayar & Son, (Partnership Firm), Represented by one of its partners VS United India Insurance Company Limited]

• "What Section Says" - Section 3(6) / Article III Para 6 (Schedule) sets a one-year limitation for filing suits for loss or damage, with the liability of carriers discharged after expiration, and allows for limited extension by court after agreement of the parties; Section 6 of the Bill of Lading provisions and seaworthiness warranties are interpreted within this statutory frame. [AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSAN LINES INC. VS JOE LOPEZ], [TEXTILES AND YARN (P)LTD. VS INDIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIP CO. LTD. ], [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ]

• "Essential ingredients" - Key elements include: (i) existence of a contract of carriage evidenced by a bill of lading; (ii) loss or damage to goods in transit; (iii) timely filing of suit within one year from delivery or from when goods should have been delivered; (iv) possible extensions by court or by agreement; (v) applicability of Hague Rules as incorporated; (vi) burden on plaintiff to prove entrustment or loss where relevant. [Container Corporation of India Ltd. , by its General Manager VS Priya Dyes & Chemicals reptd. By its Authorised Signatory, Opp. Mico Pawne Village], [Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. VS Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd], [AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSAN LINES INC. VS JOE LOPEZ]

• "Scope of Section" - The Act applies to carriage from any port in India to any other port, whether in India or outside; applicability is contingent on origin being Indian port; when goods are loaded outside India and discharged in India, treatment may differ (some cases rely on English/Japanese statutory comparisons). [Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. VS Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. ], [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ], [Steel Authority of India Ltd. VS Bangladesh Shipping Corporation]

• "Effect of Limitation" - The one-year period extinguishes liability; mere acknowledgment or estoppel cannot revive; exceptions include extensions by court up to three months when allowed, or extensions by agreement after action arises; estoppel against statute generally not recognized. [MARIAMMA NARENDRANATHAN VS SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA], [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ]

• "Burden of Proof" - Under Section 9 of Carriers Act (1865) in some cases, the carrier is absolutely liable; but under the Carriage Act framework, the burden of proving loss and entrustment rests on the plaintiff; the defendant may rely on limitations or exemptions unless proven otherwise. [Villavarayar & Son, (Partnership Firm), Represented by one of its partners VS United India Insurance Company Limited]

• "Short landing / Quantities" - Section 6 of the Act provides prima facie evidence via the bill of lading but compliance with limitation requires proving date of delivery or date it should have been delivered; short-landing claims are assessed against these time bars. [Union of India, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi VS Alaska Maritime Agencies, Alaska], [TEXTILES AND YARN (P)LTD. VS INDIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIP CO. LTD. ]

• "Bill of Lading clauses" - Clause 18 (or similar) of bills may state carrier not representing quantity; such clauses can be upheld if properly applicable, but the Act’s schedule and the carrier’s liability framework still govern whether such clauses bar claims. [Union of India, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi VS Alaska Maritime Agencies, Alaska]

• "Meaning of 'should have been delivered'" - Courts interpret “should have been delivered” as the due date; in some decisions the date is tied to port delivery schedules or surveys; others discuss starting points for limitation from the date of ship’s departure or detection of non-delivery. [AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSAN LINES INC. VS JOE LOPEZ], [JOB LOPEZ VS AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSTEN LINE INC]

• "Extinction vs limitation" - Jurisprudence like East and West Steamship Co. v. S. K. Ramalinga Chettiar holds that extinction is triggered by the one-year limit, not merely limitation in a technical sense. This has been applied in several Indian authorities to deny later claims. [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ], [MARIAMMA NARENDRANATHAN VS SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA]

• "Agency and liability" - Where an agent acts for a disclosed principal, Section 230 of the Contract Act may shield the agent from personal liability unless exceptions apply; however, the carrier remains liable under the relevant Carriage Act regime, and limitations/waivers may still affect the claim against the carrier or its agent depending on the contract. [00900017820], [JAYTEE EXPORTS VS NATVAR PAREKH INDUSTRIES LTD. ]

• "Jurisdictional reach" - Indian admiralty jurisdiction, and the broad scope of maritime claims, allow claims against carriers and their agents in Indian courts where the ship or parties are present; but limitation and the Act’s rules govern modality and timeliness. [Agarwal Enterprises VS Maersks India Ltd. and Others], [TEXTILES AND YARN (P)LTD. VS INDIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIP CO. LTD. ]

• "Waiver / Estoppel" - Indian courts have held that waiver or estoppel cannot override the mandatory limitation provisions of the Act; attempts to waive the limitation or extend beyond a year require express statutory or court-based extension. [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ]

• "Liability caps & Article IX (Gold Clause era)" - In older cases, Article IX and gold clause considerations affected carrier liability caps; modern practice focuses on extinguishment under Section 3(6)/Article III, Para 6. [Hajee Hussan VS Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. ]

• "Perils of the sea vs negligence" - Defendants may invoke 'perils of the sea' as a defense; the burden to prove perils lies with the carrier, with negligence proven on rebuttal by the plaintiff; if proven, liability may shift. [Esufali Mahammedbhoy Allibhoy VS A. K. Thaha Ummal]

• "Deficiency in service (Consumer Protection Act overlap)" - The Consumer Protection Act interacts with the Carriage Act where consumer complaints are filed; limitation under the Carriage Act typically governs, but CP Act claims may apply, with limitation periods aligned to the Act. [MALTI EXPORTS VS NATVAR PARIKH INDUSTRIES LTD. ], [MEENAKSHI VS AMERICAN PRESIDENT LINES LTD. ]

• "Limitation revival attempts" - Courts have rejected attempts to revive liability via post-facto acknowledgments or waivers; the statute operates as extinguishment in many decisions. [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ], [JAYTEE EXPORTS VS NATVAR PAREKH INDUSTRIES LTD. ]

• "Jurisdictional reach re international aspects" - The Act’s reach is shaped by whether the carriage is from Indian ports; cases discuss Japanese/English Acts when the contract is concluded abroad; Indian Act applies where loading occurs in India. [Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. VS Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. ], [BANGLADESH SHIPPING CORPORATION VS BATA INDIA LTD. ]

• "Practical takeaway" - For plaintiffs: time claims must be filed within one year from the date goods should have been delivered; ensure proper notice under Section 10 of the Carriers Act 1865 if applicable; for defendants: examine whether the shipment originated in India to determine applicable regime and potential limitation. [Villavarayar & Son, (Partnership Firm), Represented by one of its partners VS United India Insurance Company Limited], [AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSAN LINES INC. VS JOE LOPEZ]

• "Key authorities cited" - East and West Steamship Co. v. S. K. Ramalinga Chettiar; American Export Isbrand and others; various Kerala High Court and Indian High Courts decisions repeatedly analyze Section 3(6) extinction, Article III Rule 6, and related provisions. [KONSUMEX VS ANAND AND CO. ], [Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. VS Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd], [The Shipping Corporation of India Limited, registered office at Shipping House, Bombay and another VS Union of India, represented by Embarkation Commandant, Embarkation Headquarters, Madras]

• "Remedies outside statute" - In some consumer or deficiency-of-service matters, other Acts may offer remedies, but the limitation regime of the Carriage Act remains central to the action. [Agarwal Enterprises VS Maersks India Ltd. and Others], [MALTI EXPORTS VS NATVAR PARIKH INDUSTRIES LTD. ]

• "Final note" - The texts show a consistent pattern: Section 3/Art. III Para 6 creates a one-year extinction mechanism for liability; extensions require explicit court-ordered allowances or mutual agreement; the Bill of Lading terms and Hague Rules intersect but do not generally override the statute absent compliant provisions. [JAYTEE EXPORTS VS NATVAR PAREKH INDUSTRIES LTD. ], [Muhammadi Steamship Co. VS Keserishih Vallabdas]

S.4 Statement as to application of rules to be included in bills of lading

       Every bill of lading, or similar document of title, issued in 1[India] which contains or is evidence of any contract to which the rules apply, shall contain an express statement that it is to have effect subject to the provisions of the said Rules as applied by this Act.
       ---------------------------
              1. Subs. by the A.O. 1950.
       ---------------------------

S.5 Modification of Article VI of Rules in relation to goods carried in sailing ships and by prescribed routes

       Article VI of the Rules shall, in relation to—
        (a) the carriage of goods by sea in sailing ships carrying goods from any port in 1[India] to any other port whether in or outside 1[India], and
        (b) the carriage of goods by sea in ships carrying goods from a port in 1[India] notified in this behalf in the 2[Official Gazette] by the 2[Central Government] to a port in Ceylon specified in the said notification,
       have effect as though the said Article referred to goods of any class instead of to particular goods and as though the proviso to the second paragraph of the said Article were omitted.
       ------------------------------
       1. Subs. by the A.O. 1950.
     

S.6 Modification of rules 4 and 5 of Article III in relation to bulk cargoes

       Where under the custom of any trade the weight of any bulk cargo inserted in the bill of lading is a weight ascertained or accepted by a third party other than the carrier or the shipper and the fact that the weight is so ascertained or accepted is stated in the bill of lading, then, notwithstanding anything in the Rules, the bill of lading shall not be deemed to be prima facie evidence against the carrier of the receipt of goods of the weight so inserted in the bill of lading, and the accuracy thereof at the time of shipment shall not be deemed to have been guaranteed by the shipper.

S.7 Saving and operation

       (1) Nothing in this Act shall affect the operation of sections 1[2[section 331 and Part XA] of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958)], or the operation of any other enactment for the time being in force limiting the liability of the owners of sea-going vessels.
       (2) The Rules shall not by virtue of this Act apply to any contract for the carriage of goods by sea before such day, not being earlier than the first day of January, 1926, as the 3[Central Government] may, by notification in the 3[Official Gazette], appoint, nor to any bill of lading or similar document of title issued, whether before or after such day as aforesaid, in pursuance of any such contract as aforesaid.
       ------------------------------------------------
       1. Subs. by Act 52 of 1964, sec. 3 and Sch. II, for certain words

Sch Rules Relating to Bills of LadingS

       Schedule
        Article I
        Definitions
       In these Rules the following expressions have the meanings hereby assigned to them respectively, that is to say—
       (a) “carrier” includes the owner or the charterer who enters into a contract of carriage with a shipper;
       (b) “contract of carriage” applies only to contracts of carriage covered by a bill of lading or any similar document of title, in so far as such document relates to the carriage of goods by sea including any bill of lading or any similar document as aforesaid issued under or pursuant to a charter party from the moment at which such bill of lading or similar doc

Legal Comments

• "Introduction" - The Act governs carriage of goods by sea in India, codifying rights, liabilities, and immunities of carriers, and incorporating rule-based regimes such as the Hague/Visby Rules via Schedule; sources describe its aim to amend and standardize maritime carriage law - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview and Sections, Indian Kanoon]

• "What Section Says" - Section “Sch” (Schedule) encapsulates the rules relating to bills of lading, setting out carrier responsibilities, limitations, and standard terms applied to international carriage by sea, as reproduced in the Schedule of the Act - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview and Sections, Indian Kanoon]

• "Essential ingredients" - Core elements include: duties of the carrier (diligent carrier, seaworthiness where applicable), liability for loss/damage unless caused by exceptions, limitation/contractual exemption via special contracts, and the procedural framework via the schedules of rules - [DISPUTES RELATING TO CARRIAGE OF GOODS, Indian Kanoon]

• "Scope of Section" - Applies to carriage of goods by sea involving Indian territory, extending to ships engaged in international and domestic voyages; Schedule governs rules relating to (i) bills of lading, (ii) carrier obligations, and (iii) liability regimes - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - The Act Extends to the whole of India, Indian Kanoon]

• "Punishment for Section" - The Act itself does not prescribe specific criminal penalties for non-compliance; penalties manifest through civil liabilities, damages, and contractual liabilities under the rules and schedules; some sources note lack of explicit penalties in the Act while liability arises from loss/damage scenarios - [Karma AI summaries of Penalties; Indian Kanoon analyses]

• "Relation to Bills of Lading" - The Schedule contains the code of rules relating to bills of lading; the carrier’s duties, and the rights of consignees are anchored in these rules, which may permit exemption or limitation via contract - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview, Indian Kanoon]

• "Liability regime" - The Act defines liability of the common carrier for loss or damage to goods, with potential limitations through special contracts and adherence to the rules in Schedule; measures accountability without prescribing explicit punitive fines - [DISPUTES RELATING TO CARRIAGE OF GOODS, Indian Kanoon]

• "Immunities and defenses" - The Schedule provides immunities/defenses available to carriers under stipulated conditions, including exceptions where the carrier is not liable; these typically revolve around acts of God, perils of the sea, and other standard exemptions in maritime law - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview, Indian Kanoon]

• "Application of Rules" - The Act applies the rules relating to bills of lading, and modifications to specific Articles in relation to sailing ships and prescribed routes; this indicates a nuanced application depending on voyage type and vessel - [PDF: The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925; Modification of Article VI, etc.]

• "Codification of rights" - The Act codifies rights and liabilities of carriers, aligning with international maritime law frameworks (Hague/Visby rules as reflected in schedules) to standardize carriage of goods by sea in India - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview, Indian Kanoon]

• "Jurisdictional reach" - The Act extends to the whole of India, applying to ships within Indian jurisdiction and those carrying goods to or from Indian ports, as established in the Act’s general provisions - [ACT NO:X.XVIOF 1925, India Code; The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Overview, Indian Kanoon]

• "Relation to modern reforms" - Several sources discuss 2025 reforms and replacement proposals, but the 1925 Act remains the governing statute in many references; the 2025 discussions indicate replacement of or expansion beyond the 1925 framework - [Why India's New Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 2025 Is a ...; The Indian Carriage Of Goods By Sea Act, 1925 - Overview]

• "Schedule vs. substantive text" - The Schedule contains the detailed rules (Bills of Lading, carrier duties, and limitations), while the substantive sections establish operative parameters and scope; this separation affects interpretation and enforcement - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Schedule; Indian Kanoon]

• "Remedies" - Remedies for breach primarily arise via damages, exemptions, and contractual limitations under the Rules in the Schedule, rather than criminal sanctions under the Act - [DISPUTES RELATING TO CARRIAGE OF GOODS; Karma AI summaries]

• "Interaction with international law" - The Act codifies internationally recognized rules for carriage of goods by sea, and its schedules reflect Hague/Visby typologies, aligning domestic law with global maritime principles - [Scribd/Overview of Bill of Lading; 1925 Act overview]

• "Operational impact on carriers" - Carriers are required to comply with the schedules; failure to comply may expose them to civil liability and claims from shippers/consignees, as set forth in the Act’s frameworks - [Indian Kanoon – The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925; DISPUTES RELATING TO CARRIAGE OF GOODS]

• "Limitations and exclusions" - The Act allows certain contractual exemptions/limitations via special contracts under the Schedule; careful drafting of bills of lading is essential to preserve valid immunities - [DISPUTES RELATING TO CARRIAGE OF GOODS; Indian Kanoon]

• "Practical takeaway" - For practitioners: focus on the Schedule's rules on bills of lading, understand the carrier's immunities and liability caps, and assess remedies through civil action rather than penal proceedings - [The Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925 - Schedule; Indian Kanoon]

• "Historical significance" - The Act was enacted to amend and modernize law on carriage of goods by sea in 1925 and has shaped Indian maritime liability regimes for nearly a century, including subsequent discussions on reform - [Haryana Industries; Indian Kanoon - Overview]