Law: Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance (XLII of 1980)

Section: 3

Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance (XLII of 1980)--Ss. 3(2)(h) & 4(4)---Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Court---Arrest of ships---Action in personam---Scope---Action in rem against a sister vessel/ship---Scope---Contract of carriage---Plaintiff/consignor shipped first consignment through vessels 'A' (defendant) and 'B', while the second consignment was sent through vessels 'C' (defendant) and 'D'---Failure on part of the shipping companies (defendants) to obtain bank guarantees necessary for the release of consignments---Effect---Plaintiff suffered monetary loss and consequently filed two suits against the defendants in the High Court which were decreed in its favour---Appellate Bench of the High Court modified the decree of the High Court by reducing the amount of the decree on the basis that in the first suit vessel 'B' had not been impleaded as a defendant nor was it averred in the plaint that the vessel 'B' was a sister ship of 'A' and similarly in the second suit plaintiff had not impleaded vessel 'D' as a defendant nor had any averment been made in the plaint that said vessel was a sister ship of the vessel 'C'---Contention of the defendants was that the sister ships 'B' and 'D' had been wrongfully and unlawfully arrested in the suits because said ships were not parties and in the absence of pleadings to establish their relationship with other vessels, the sister ships could not be burdened with the liability for the plaintiff's claim---Validity---Claim of the plaintiff was based on the contract of carriage executed on behalf of the shipping companies and the modification agreed by them that the consignments would be released against bank guarantees and not on DAP basis as originally agreed---Admittedly the bank guarantees which the shipping companies were obliged to obtain on behalf of the plaintiff, before releasing the consignment to the consignee were forged---Defendants released the consignments without obtaining the bank guarantees because of which the plaintiff did suffer a monetary loss---Sections 3(2)(h) and 4(4) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance, 1980, made it clear that an action in personam could be founded…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492