Mercury Marine Suppliers v. M V Kamal Xxvi And ORS

adms29-14.doc sg

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ADMIRALTY SUIT NO.29 OF 2014 Mercury Marine Supplies ...Plaintiff vs M.V. Kamal XXVI And Ors.

...Defendants .....

Mr. Revannath Shirole, a/w. Ms. Bindu Bhatia, i/b. Mr. Amin Kherada, for the Plaintiff.

....

CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.

DATED : APRIL 6, 2018 P.C. :

.

This admiralty suit is filed for recovery of value of necessaries supplied by the Plaintiff to Defendant No.11, who is the owner of some of the Defendant vessels, namely, Defendant Nos. 2, 6, 7 and 8. The writ of summons has been duly served on all the Defendants. There is an affidavit in proof of such service on record. On the last occasion, i.e. on 15 March 2018, the suit was dismissed as withdrawn against Defendant Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10, since these vessels were no more owned or chartered by Defendant No.11, who owes these dues to the Plaintiff in personam. No appearance is entered on behalf of these Defendants, namely, Defendant Nos. 2, 6, 7, 8 and 11. There is no written statement on behalf of either of these Defendants.

2.

It is the Plaintiff's case that, by an agreement dated 19 April 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to supply provision/stores to the vessels owned by Defendant No.11. At the relevant time, Defendant Nos. 1 to 10 vessels were owned by Defendant No.11. The Plaintiff supplied provisions/stores to these vessels in accordance with the agreement. The Plaintiff raised invoices Pg 1 of 2

adms29-14.doc as well as delivery challans in respect of these supplies. Based on these deliveries and invoices raised against them, the Plaintiff has made demands from time to time for payment of money on Defendant No.11. Several communications have been exchanged between the parties in this behalf. Defendant No.11 never contested any of these dues and throughout kept assuring the Plaintiff that the dues will be paid. 3.

The Plaintiff has tendered the originals of the documents such as the original registration certificate of the vessels in favour of Defendant No.11, agreement dated 19 April 2013 entered into between the parties, office copies of invoices and delivery challans and correspondence between the parties. The Plaintiff has also filed affidavit of evidence of one Madhav Pappu Salian, Partner of the Plaintiff( PW1), proving the various documents. 4.

Based on the evidence of PW1, the original documents produced by the Plaintiff in the compilation are marked serially as documents 'P-1' to 'P-50'.

5.

Based on the oral and documentary evidence tendered by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has made out the maritime claim The Defendants have failed to pay the value of the necessaries supplied by the Plaintiff to the vessels owned/chartered by Defendant No.11.

6.

The suit is, accordingly, decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) as against Defendant Nos. 2, 6, 7, 8 and 11. ( S.C. GUPTE, J. ) Pg 2 of 2