AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In this application, the decree holder in the admiralty suit has prayed for a direction upon the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court to pay the money realised on encashment of the bank guarantee furnished as security in the admiralty suit, for its nominated foreign account in compliance with the applicable laws and towards satisfaction of the decree passed in the suit.
It appears that on June 6, 2000, a learned Single Judge of this Court passed an order in the admiralty suit directing arrest of the vessel M. V. Nikolaos-S along with her tackle, apparel and furniture. Subsequently, on June 20, 2000 an order was passed for vacating of the order of arrest of the vessel, subject to a bank guarantee or letter of guarantee for a sum of Rs.45,43,663.92/- being furnished, on behalf of the owner of the vessel, to the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court. In terms of the said direction, a bank guarantee of Rs.45,43,663.92/- was furnished by MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd. an Indian Company, which allegedly purchased the vessel from Fairsteel Corporation, Singapore the original owner, to the Registrar, Original Side of this Court and the order of arrest dated June 6, 2000 stood vacated The said MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd. filed the written statement and contested the suit. By a judgement dated April 28, 2005, the admiralty suit was decreed against the said vessel for US $ 94,611.25 equivalent to in Indian Currency of Rs.42,47,500/-, together with interest accrued upon the deposit with the learned Registrar, Original Side to the plaintiff. Against the said judgement and decree, the said MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal, being APD No.244 of 2005, before the Division Bench of this Court. By a judgement dated September 13, 2006, the Division Bench of this Court set aside the judgement and decree dated April 28, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge. The plaintiff carried the said judgement dated September 12, 2006 passed by the Division Bench before Supreme Court, by filing a Special Leave Petition being Civil Appeal No.193 of 2008. By a judgement dated September 14, 2017 the Supreme Court allowed the said appeal by setting aside the judgement of the Division Bench and restoring the judgement and decree dated April 28, 2005 passed by the learned trial Judge.
The said bank guarantee furnished by MGR Steels Pvt. Ltd. in favour of the Registrar, Original Side of this Court has been extended till June 27, 2018. The plaintiff-decree holder, which is a company incorporated under the appropriate laws of Liberia, by its letter dated September 16, 2017 informed the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court that it has authorised the Advocate-on-Record representing it in the suit to receive all funds and remittance against the encashment of the bank guarantee towards satisfaction of the decree passed in the suit in its favour, who would receive the same in its bank account in trust for the plaintiff/decree holder and thereafter remit the same to the nominated bank account outside India.
It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of repeated requests being made to the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court, the latter has refused to release the proceeds of the bank guarantee in favour of its Advocate-on- Record.
From the affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner, it appears that in spite of service of this application, none appears on behalf of MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd. who allegedly purchased the said vessel from one Fairsteel Corporation, Singapore and contesting the suit and carried the judgement and decree passed by the claiming to be the owner of the said vessel and contended the admiralty suit and furnished the bank guarantee to the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court. Let the affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner be kept on record.
Having considered the materials on record, I find that in terms of the judgement passed by the Supreme Court dated September 14, 2017 in Civil Appeal No.193 of 2008 the right of the present petitioner, as the decree holder in the admiralty suit to receive the proceeds of the said bank guarantee for Rs.42,57,500/- has attained finality.
It is the case of the plaintiff decree holder that it is incorporated under the appropriate laws of Liberia and it does not have any office or any bank account in India. Therefore, the plaintiff-decree holder has authorised its Advocate-on-Record, namely, Victor Moses & Co., Solicitors and Advocates to receive the proceeds of the bank guarantee encashed by the learned Registrar, Original Side of this Court and to transmit the same to it after compliance of all legal requirements, through proper banking channel and procedure authorised by the Reserve Bank of India.
In view of the aforementioned facts of the case, I find that the petitioner is entitled to obtain an order, as prayed for in this application. Accordingly, there shall be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the application.
With the above directions, GA No. 4067 of 2017, in AS No. 1 of 2000 stands allowed.
There shall, however, be no order as costs.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
All the parties, the learned Registrar, Original Side and all concerned shall act on copies of the certified website copies of this order.