SEROS SHIPPING PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. NAND HAZIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Ms. Paurami Sheth for the plaintiff and learned advocate Mr. Shashvata Shukla appearing on behalf of learned advocate Mr. Tirth Pandya for the defendant.

(2.) Learned advocate Ms. Sheth submitted that the Plaintiff had entered into Bare Boat Charter dtd. 12/1/2019 with the owner of the Defendant Vessel, Nand Aparna and Nand Ananya. As per the agreement, the Plaintiff was to pay in all Rs.4,00,00,000.00 on behalf of the Defendant Vessel owner towards crew wages earlier appointed by the owner and expenses for dry dock of all three vessels, which amount was to be adjusted against the charter hire payable by the Plaintiff to the owner. The Plaintiff has maintained the account in the name of the owner, Simcement Private Limited, Mumbai. The Plaintiff paid in all a sum of Rs.4,39,90,331.00 towards crew wages and dry dock expenses. The Plaintiff further spent for Insurance Premium and fuels to the tune of Rs.14,85,643.00 and Rs.15,35,665.00 respectively. Thus the Plaintiff has in all spent Rs.4,70,11,639.00 on behalf of the Defendant Vessel as well for Nand Aparna and Nand Ananya. As against that the plaintiff is required to pay Rs.3,75,80,400.00 to the Owner of the Defendant Vessel, Nand Aparna and Nand Ananya towards charter hire calculated from 28/1/2019 (Date of delivery of the Vessels) till 20/6/2021 (Date of termination of BBC), excluding charter hire for days for which the Defendant Vessel, Nand Aparna and Nand Ananya were under arrest on account of default of Owner of the said Vessels pursuant to clause 17(b). As per lateral defect Clause, the Plaintiff is required to adjust the amount spent by it against Charter hire payable to the Owner of the Defendant Vessel under BBC, and accordingly, the Defendant Vessel Owner is liable to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.94,31,239.00 after adjusting the amount payable to it by the plaintiff. The present suit is being filed inter alia for recovery of unpaid amount due which claim has arisen out of Agreement related to use and hire for the Defendant Vessel against the defendant Vessel and her Owner which is maritime claim against the Defendant Vessel and inter alia prayed for arrest of the Defendant Vessel.

(3.) Learned advocate Ms. Sheth further submitted that the Owner of the Defendant Vessels vide Clause 17(b) of Bare Boat Charter Agreement agreed to indemnify the Plaintiff from all the loss, expenses, damages including charter hire of the arrest during the defendant vessel, Nand Aparna and Nand Ananya under arrest on account of a claim/s against the Owner of the Defendant Vessel. The Defendant Vessel has been arrested solely on the default of the Owner of the Defendant Vessel due to which the Plaintiff has suffered the loss of profit. The Plaintiff reserves its right to claim the same as and when the loss is quantified. The Plaintiff has filed OJCA No. 1 of 2022 in AS No. 16 of 2021 for Nand Aparna and OJCA No. 1 of 2022 in AS No. 17 of 2021 for the Defendant Vessel and Nand Ananya to join and intervene for securing its interest and payment of expenses spent post arrest order and not included the said claim in present Suit. The Plaintiff, however, reserves its right to include the said claim in present Suit in case said Applications are not entertained or the Plaintiff has not been paid the said amount. Thus the Plaintiff craves leave under order 2 Rule 2 to include any other and further claim.