Maritime lien - Indian Laws - General

Meaning of Maritime lien In Saba International Shipping and Project Investment Private Limited v. Owners and parties interested in the Vessel M.V. Brave Eagle, previously known as M.V. Lima-I and Ors.-, another single Judge of the same High Court differentiated between a maritime claim and a maritime lien and held as follows: 22. No Indian Statute defines a maritime claim is the clear finding of Supreme Court in M.V. Elisabeth- 1992 (2) TMI 369 - SUPREME COURT . But our Supreme Court followed the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1981 of England where maritime claims have been listed on the basis of Brussels Convention of 1952 on the Arrest of Sea Going Ships. Under Article 1 of the said Convention various maritime claims have been catalogued. Out of which 1(k) answers the description of the claims of the Plaintiff in this proceeding. Article 1(k) reads goods or materials whether supplied to a ship for her operation or maintenance . Even though India is not a signatory to the Brussels Convention, but the Supreme Court held that the provisions of these Conventions should be regarded as part of International Common Law and these provisions supplement and complement our maritime laws and fill up the lacunae in The Merchant Shipping Act. 23. But in Elisabeth, the Hon ble Supreme Court did not notice any convention on maritime lien. However the Hon ble Supreme Court accepted in para 57 of Elisabeth the judicial determination of the concept of maritime lien by English courts and which I quote as follows: A maritime lien is a privileged claim against the ship or a right to a part of the property in the ship, and it travels with the ship. Because the ship has to pay for the wrong it has done , it can be compelled to do so by a forced sale. (See The Bold Buccleugh, (1852) 7 Moo PCC 267). 24. A definition of maritime lien has also been given in Stroud s Judicial Dictionary, 5th Edition page 1466 to the following effect: A maritime lien may be defined as a right specifically binding a ship, her furniture, tackle, cargo, and freight, or any of them, for payment of a claim founded upon the maritime law and entitling the claimant to take judicial proceedings against the property bound to enforce, or to ascertain and enforce, satisfaction of his demand; thus, a salvor has a maritime lien on the property saved for such an amount as a court exercising admiralty jurisdiction shall award. Maritime lien are distinguished from all other liens in these two chief particulars: (i) they are in no way founded on possession or property in the claimant, (ii) they are exercised by taking proceedings against the property itself in a form of action styled an action in rem (The Glasgow Packet, 2 Rob. W. 312; The Repulse, 4 Notes of Cas. 170), and, from this and their secret nature, they closely resemble the species of security known to Roman law under the name of hypotheca (Dig. xiii). Interest, if any allowed, and the costs of enforcing a claim for which a maritime lien exists, will be included in such lien (The Margaret, 3 Hagg. Adm. 240). 25. According to the well known treatise of Thomas on maritime lien, the following claims may give rise to maritime lien namely: (a) Damage done by a ship (b) Salvage (c) Seamen s wages (d) Master s wages and disbursements (e) Bottomry and Respondentia . 26. The aforesaid passage from Thomas has been approved by the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court in Mohammed Saleh Behbehani Company v. Bhoja Trader, reported in (1983) 2 Calcutta Law Journal 334. At 344 of the report, the learned Judges of the Division Bench referred to maritime liens as representing a small cluster of claims and referred to the aforementioned passage from Thomas.[ CHRISOMAR CORPORATION VERSUS MJR STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.- 2017 (9) TMI 1883 - SUPREME COURT ]