Gujarat High Court orders arrest of merchant ship MT Syrma on plea by Patanjali

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday directed the port and customs authorities at Deendayal Port, Kandla to arrest a merchant ship, MT Syrma..Justice Nikhil S Kariel ordered the ship's arrest along with its hull, engines, gears, tackles, bunkers, machinery, apparel, plant, furniture and equipment and all appurtenances on two separate suits filed by Patanjali Foods and Auriga Shipping Management..The suit by Patanjali alleged short delivery of 5000 Metric Tonnes (MT) of RBD Palm Olein (Edible Grade), which was supposed to be delivered at Kakinada Port.According to the plea, Patanjali received only 4930.840 MT, resulting in a shortage of 68.734 MT or 1.37%. Letters highlighting the apparent discrepancy and requesting monetary compensation, as well as a legal notice, were sent, but the Master of the vessel did not respond to any of them, it was was claimed.Hence, Patanjali contended that they had a maritime claim falling under Section 4(1)(d) and 4(1)(f) of The Admiralty (Jurisdiction & Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act against the vessel for which they filed the suit and prayed for arrest of the ship.The suit by Auriga Shipping Management said that it entered into a ship management agreement with the owner of the vessel but the owner had not paid them the annual management fee in accordance with the terms of the agreement. As a result, Auriga contended that they had a maritime claim falling under Section 4(1)(o) and 4(1)(p) of The Admiralty (Jurisdiction & Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act. They also prayed for the arrest of the ship..Upon the plaintiffs undertaking in writing to the Registrar of the Court to pay such sums by way of damages as the Court may award as compensation in the event of the defendants being prejudiced by the order, the Court issued notice returnable on June 26.The Court also ordered the Registrar to issue a warrant for arrest of the ship lying at Deendayal port and directed the port as well as customs authorities to effect the arrest, seizure or detention of the vessel within Indian territorial waters.The Court, in both orders, clarified that the arrest warrant would not be executed if the claimed sums, along with legal fees as well as interest are deposited with the Court..Advocate Paurami B Sheth appeared for the plaintiffs..[Read Orders].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.