Plea For Recovering Dues Against Vessel Under Admiralty Act, Which Is A Special Statute, Maintainable Before High Court: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court has said that a petition filed seeking a decree against a vessel (ship) would be maintainable before the High Court under the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 and not before the Commercial Court.

Justice Dr Chillakur Sumalatha held thus while dismissing the petition filed by Shipoil Limited, seeking to return the petition filed by M. T. Standorf. The respondent had filed the petition seeking the Court to pass a decree against the vessel by name M.T. STANDORF for recovery of a sum of EUR.506,512.66 equivalent to INR 4,05,21,732.80 (Rupees Four Crores Five Lakhs Twenty one Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Two and eighty paise only) towards outstanding principal amount of EUR.457,149.36 and the accrued interest thereon and other allied reliefs including sale of the vessel by public auction.

The petitioner contended that the case of the respondent falls within the scope and definition of "Commercial Dispute" as enshrined under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and therefore the designated commercial division of this Court should entertain the case.

However, the respondent submitted that the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 makes it clear that the High Court is vested with the exclusive original and admiralty jurisdiction over the matters falling within the ambit of the said Act and therefore the petition is not maintainable.

The bench referred to both Acts and noted,"Thus, the Admiralty Act, 2017 states in definite terms the nature of cases in which the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction in respect of maritime claims".

Further it said “The aim and object of the Admiralty Act, 2017 is to consolidate the existing laws of admiralty jurisdiction of Courts, proceedings on maritime claims, arrest of vessels and related issues. The Admiralty Act, 2017 dealt with the vessels which fall under the ambit of the said Act, maritime claims, territorial waters etc. The said Act is specifically legislated to consolidate the laws relating to admiralty jurisdiction and the legal proceedings in connection with the vessels. The procedure of arrest, detention and sale of the vessels is also included. Undoubtedly, such a procedure is not found in the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.”

The court observed that while the Commercial Courts Act is a general statue which is aimed at Constitution of Commercial Courts, the Commercial Appellate Courts etc. for dealing with commercial disputes, the Admiralty Act is a specific statute aimed at regulating the legal proceedings in connection with the Maritime Claims as defined under Section 4 of the said Act.

The court thus held, “The legal maxim "lex specialis derogat legi generali" covers the field. This doctrine states that, if two laws govern the same factual situation, a law governing a specific subject matter (lex specialis) overrides a law governing general matters (lex generalis). While the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is a general statute, the legislation brought into effect thereafter that is the Admiralty Act, 2017 is a specific statue covering the Maritime Claims. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 applies rightly and governs the lis in question.”

Accordingly it dismissed the petition.

Appearance: Advocate Balaji Harish Iyer for Petitioner.

Advocate B.N.Maheshchandra for Respondent.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 24

Case Title: Shipoil Limited AND MT Standorf

Case No: CIVIL PETITION NO. 23 OF 2020

Click Here To Read/Download Order