NDLI: Owners and Parties Interested in The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy Vs. Banque Cantonale De Geneve

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act 1908 – Or.1 r.10(2) 2017 – s.14 – Code of Civil Procedure
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 – s.14 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or.1 r.10(2) – Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Whether an appeal lies to the Commercial Appellate Division of the High Court from an order of the Commercial Division (Single Bench) of the same High Court for addition of a party, in an Admiralty Suit governed by the Admiralty Act – Held: No – An order for addition of a party u/Or.1 r.10(2) of the CPC is not appealable u/s.14 of the Admiralty Act –Maritime Laws. Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 – ss.12, 14 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. 1 r.10(2), Or.43 r.1 – Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – s.13 – Interpretation of Statutes – Harmonious Construction – Held: s.14 of the Admiralty Act provides the fora for an appeal from any judgment, decree, final order or interim order of a Single Judge of the High Court under the Admiralty Act to a Division Bench of the High Court – “any interim order” has to be read harmoniously with Or. 43, r. 1 of the CPC in view of s.12 of the Admiralty Act r/w s.13 of the Commercial Courts Act – It is not the intent of the overriding provision of s.14 to nullify s.12 of the Admiralty Act – s.12 of the Admiralty Act applies to all proceedings in the High Court whether they be original proceedings or appellate proceedings – On a harmonious reading of ss.12 and 14 of the Admiralty Act with s.13 of the Commercial Courts Act, an intra-court appeal under the Admiralty Act to the Commercial Division of the High Court would lie from any judgment, decree or final order under the Admiralty Act or an interim order under the Admiralty Act relatable to the orders specified in Or. 43, r.1 – It could not possibly have been the legislative intent of the Admiralty Act to make all interim orders appealable – Such a wide interpretation of the expression “interim order” would mean that any party would be able to delay the trial and final disposal by filing appeals even from inconsequential orders calling for affidavits and the like – Maritime Laws. Bills of Lading – Concept of – Law governing bills of lading – Discussed. Interpretation of Statutes – Non-Obstante Clause in two or more statutes – Held: As a general rule, the Special Statutes prevail over General Statutes – If both statutes are general statutes or special statutes containing identical or similar non-obstante clauses, the later statute would prevail – However, the rule that a non-obstante clause in a later statute prevails over the non-obstante clause in an earlier statute is not an absolute rule – The question of which provision prevails, would necessarily depend on the object of the enactment and, in particular, the object of giving overriding effect to the enactment or any specific provision thereof – When two or more enactments operating in the same field contain a non obstante clause stating that its provisions will have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law, the conflict has to be resolved upon consideration of the purpose and policy underlying the enactments – Maxims – Generalia Specialibus Non Derogant. Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – s.2(1)(c)(iii) – Held: A dispute arising out of issues relating to admiralty and maritime law is a commercial dispute as defined in s.2(1)(c)(iii) of the Commercial Courts Act – Maritime Laws.
Judge	Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 1015
Petitioner	Owners And Parties Interested In The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy
Respondent	Banque Cantonale De Geneve
SCR	[2022] 10 S.C.R. 1
Judgement Date	2022-09-23
Case Number	6897-6898

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Owners and Parties Interested in The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy Vs. Banque Cantonale De Geneve

Please Log-in to view this content

The Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017

नावधिकरण (समुद्री दावा की अधिकारिता और निपटारा) अधिनियम,2017

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION STEPHEN COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ AS No. 3 of 2000 INWBKOHC 2067 (14 February 2008)]

Admiralty Jurisdiction GMS MARINE COMPANY LTD. v. THE OWNERS & PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ GA No. 3121 of 2009 INWBKOHC 3128 (10 February 2010)]

Admiralty Jurisdiction LMJ INTERNAIONAL LTD. v. THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ GA No. 358 of 2011 INWBKOHC 2931 (10 February 2011)]

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION VEER VARDHMAN TEXTILE MILLS LTD. v. THE OWNERS & PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ AS No. 9 of 2006 INWBKOHC 1003 (18 January 2008)]

BUNKERS INTERNATIONAL v. OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL M.V. [ AS No. 5 of 2009 INWBKOHC 2980 (2 March 2009)]

Mayar (h.k.) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Owners & Parties, Vessel M.v. Fortune Express and Ors.

BONAFIDE MARITIME TRADERS v. OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL MV [ TA No. 11 of 2010 INWBKOHC 2175 (2 February 2010)]

Owners and Parties Interested in The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy Vs. Banque Cantonale De Geneve

Owners and Parties Interested in The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy Vs. Banque Cantonale De Geneve

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

The Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017

नावधिकरण (समुद्री दावा की अधिकारिता और निपटारा) अधिनियम,2017

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION STEPHEN COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ AS No. 3 of 2000 INWBKOHC 2067 (14 February 2008)]

Admiralty Jurisdiction GMS MARINE COMPANY LTD. v. THE OWNERS & PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ GA No. 3121 of 2009 INWBKOHC 3128 (10 February 2010)]

Admiralty Jurisdiction LMJ INTERNAIONAL LTD. v. THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ GA No. 358 of 2011 INWBKOHC 2931 (10 February 2011)]

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION VEER VARDHMAN TEXTILE MILLS LTD. v. THE OWNERS & PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL [ AS No. 9 of 2006 INWBKOHC 1003 (18 January 2008)]

BUNKERS INTERNATIONAL v. OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL M.V. [ AS No. 5 of 2009 INWBKOHC 2980 (2 March 2009)]

Mayar (h.k.) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Owners & Parties, Vessel M.v. Fortune Express and Ors.

BONAFIDE MARITIME TRADERS v. OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL MV [ TA No. 11 of 2010 INWBKOHC 2175 (2 February 2010)]

Owners and Parties Interested in The Vessel M.v. Polaris Galaxy Vs. Banque Cantonale De Geneve