(Prayer: pleased to grant the following relief in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant A. For a decree in its favor and against the Defendant Vessel for a sum of INR 7,16,07,919/- and further contractual interest on the said principal amount of INR 6,93,57,919/- @ 12 percent p.a. from the date of filing of this suit till payment and / or realization. B. That the Defendant-Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280) is a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, equipment, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, within the territorial waters over which this Honble Court exercises jurisdiction be ordered to be arrested under a warrant of arrest issued by this Honble Court C. That the Defendant-Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280), a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, equipment, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, within the territorial waters over which this Honble Court exercises jurisdiction be detained, condemned and sold under orders and directions of this Honble Court and the sale proceeds thereof be applied towards the satisfaction of the plaintiff claim in the suit D. That pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendant- Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280), a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, within the territorial waters over which this Honble Court exercises jurisdiction be arrested and detained under the orders of this Honble Court and/or be restrained by an order of injunction of this Honble Court from sailing out of the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh and/or moving out of the waters over which this Honble Court exercises admiralty jurisdiction D. That pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendant- Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280), a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, within the territorial waters over which this Honble Court exercises jurisdiction be arrested and detained under the orders of this Honble Court and/or be restrained by an order of injunction of this Honble Court from sailing out of the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh and/or moving out of the waters over which this Honble Court exercises admiralty jurisdiction E. That pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendant- Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280), a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, within the territorial waters over which this Honble Court exercises jurisdiction be appraised by any suitable marine surveyors according to true value thereof and upon such value certified in writing by the said surveyors, the Defendant Vessel be sold by public auction free and clear from all existing claims, liens, and/or any encumbrances for the highest price that can be obtained F. For costs of the suit G. For such other and further reliefs as in the nature and circumstances of the case this Honble Court may deem fit and proper.

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to permit me i.e., Mr. Ravi Aggarwal to represent the Petitioner vide Power of Attorney dated 23.03.2016 in the present proceedings and to pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased prayed that pending hearing and disposal of the suit, the Defendant-Vessel, M.V. Lardos (IMO No. 9550280), a motor vessel flying the flag of Marshal Islands along with her hull, tackle, boats, machinery, appurtenances and all other paraphernalia, presently at the port and harbor of Visakhapatnam, be arrested and detained under the orders of this Hon’ble Court and/or be restrained from sailing out of the port and harbour of Visakhapatnam Port, till security towards the Plaintiff’s claim of INR 7,16,07,919/- (Rupees Seven Crore Sixteen Lakh Seven Thousand Nine Hundred and Nineteen Only) in the suit/other appropriate proceeding is furnished and pass)

COMS No.9 of 2025

Admit.

Post after two (02) weeks.

I.A.No.2 of 2025

1. This application is filed by the plaintiff to issue Warrant of Arrest against Defendant No.1 Vessel M.V. LARDOS (IMO 9550280) along with her hull, engines, gears, tackle, bunkers, machinery, apparel, plaint, furniture, fixtures, appurtenances and paraphernalia, plant and machinery, which is presently anchored at Visakhpatnam Port, which is within the territorial waters of India and within the admiralty jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The plaintiff (buyer) contracted to purchase 12,001 Metric Tonnes of Dilhydrate Poly Halite Cargo from ICL Europe Cooperatie U.A, United Kingdom/seller, vide Bill of Lading dated 30.09.2025 to be shipped from the load port Teesport – United Kingdom to discharge port at Visakhapatnam, India. The 1st respondent vessel arrived at Visakhapatnam Port on 02.12.2025, to discharge of the Cargo. On 03.12.2025, when the plaintiff commenced discharge operations, it was observed that the cargo in Hatch No.2 and Hatch No.4 of the 1st respondent vessel was mixed with water, resulting in damaged cargo of consolidated lumps and moisture – affected material in those sections of the hatches to the tune of 2911 Metric Tonnes. Letter of Protest was raised by the plaintiff on 03.12.2025, putting the owner of the 1st respondent vessel to notice that they would be liable for the damages caused by the said issues. The said fact ws also admitted by the cargo handling agency on bhelaf of the port on 03.12.2025 and addressed a letter to the defendant.

3. On 04.12.2025, the plaintiff got the Cargo inspected by an independent third party surveyor namely M/s. Peters and Prasad Assocaites, who issued a report confirming that water was present in cargo in Hatch No.2 and Hatch No.4. Thereafter, the plaintiff addressed an e-mail dated 05.12.2025 to the agents of the 1st respondent vessel informing that 2911 Metric Tonnes out of the total 12,001 Metric Tonnes cargo was in a wet and damaged condition and stated that the said cargo of 2911 Metric Tonnes was contaminated and unfit for its intended purpose namely distribution of fertilizer to farmers in India and raised claim for an amount of Rs.6,93,57,919/-, which was received by the agent of the 1st respondent. Similarly, the assessment of the damaged goods was also communited to the 1st respondent on 05.12.2025 and the same was received and acknowledged. Having received the demand/liability of the 1st respondent vessel, even after lapse of three days, the 1st respondent neither replied denying the smae nor communicated any reponse. Therefore, the short of delivery in quantity or damage in connection with the goods is certainly a Maritime claim as defined under Sectuion 4(F) of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims), 2017

4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that, Defendant No.1 Vessel has short-delivered the goods which it contracted to deliver, as such, it is liable to make good the lossess and damage which has been suffered by the plaintiff organization.

5. He submits that the Hon’ble High Courts have inherent and plenary jurisdiction to deal with such claim in accordance with general principles and applicable statutory law and order arrest of ship. In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.V. Elisabeth and others vs. Harwan Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd [1993 Supp (2) SCC 433].

6. None appears for the defendants.

7. Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the material available on record.

8. A foreign vessel, no matter what flag she flies, owes temporary and local allegiance to the sovereign of any port to which she comes and the persons in such a vessel likewise must obey the laws and regulations of the port. All foreign merchant ships and persons thereon fall under the jurisdiction of a coastal State as they enter its waters and the coastal States are entitled to assume jurisdiction in respect of maritime claims against foreign merchant ships lying in their waters and these ships are liable to be arrested and detained for the enforcement of maritime claims. Therefore, the courts of the country in which a foreign ship harbours, roadsteads and the territorial waters, subject itself to the jurisdiction of the local authorities in respect of maritime claims and it is liable to be arrested for the enforcement of such claims. (vide M.V. Elisabeth and others vs. Harwan Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd)

9. On perusal of the record placed before this Court, it would show that the plaintiff has raised a specific maritime claim against the 1st respondent vessel for damaged cargo valued at Rs. 6,93,57,919/-. This amount was detailed in a statement of account dated 05.12.2025, which was duly received/acknowledged by the 1st respondent vessel.

10. Exhibit-N – Port Schedule of Visakhapatnam Port shows that the 1st respondent vessel which is anchored presently at Visakhpatnam Port is scheduled to leave on 09.12.2025 after loading Granite Blocks.

11. Since Defendant No.1 vessel is anchored at Visakhapatnam Port, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, this Court has admiralty jurisdiction over the same as per the provisions of the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims), 2017 (for short Act, 2017). Therefore, this Court finds that the averments in the affidavit, documents produced by the plaintiff and submissions of learned counsel for the plaintiff would make out a maritime claim against Defendant No.1 under Section 4(F) of the Act, 2017 to invoke the admiralty jurisdiction of this Court conferred under Section 5 for arrest and detention of Respondent No.1 vessel, in order to obtain security for the claim.

12. This Court is satisfied that an arguable maritime claim is made out by the plaintiff, warranting a conditional order of arrest of Defendant No.1 vessel till Defendant No.1 furnishes security for the maritime claim.

13. Therefore, the following conditional order is passed:

                  (i) The 1st defendant vessel by name “M.V. LARDOS (IMO 9550280)” along with along with her hull, engines, gears, tackle, bunkers, machinery, apparel, plaint, furniture, fixtures, appurtenances and paraphernalia, plant and machinery, which is presently anchored at Visakhpatnam Port, is ordered to be arrested until Rs.6,93,57,919/- is deposited within a period of 48 hours from today, by the 1st defendant, before the Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Court or until security for the said amount is furnished by the 1st respondent to the satisfaction of this Court.

                  (ii) It is ordered that the 2nd respondent – The Port Officer, Visakhapatnam Port shall execute the Warrant and effect the arrest, seizure and detention of the said vessel ““M.V. LARDOS (IMO 9550280) ” along with along with her hull, engines, gears, tackle, bunkers, machinery, apparel, plaint, furniture, fixtures, appurtenances and paraphernalia, plant and machinery, as ordered above.

                  (iii) The 2nd defendant is hereby directed that, after execution of arrest of 1st defendant Vessel, submit compliance report in detail to this Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of arrest of the Vessel.

                  (iv) It is made clear that this order will not in any way prevent the loading and unloading of cargo of the vessel.

                  (v) Learned counsel for the plaintiff is permitted to inform the order of this Court to the respondents.