Shipping or sea borne trade is oldest and predominant of ocean users. Maritime law evolved from the customs and practice of early merchants and seafarers and was largely private and commercial in character. Since ancient times, northern Europe has enjoyed a great seafaring tradition which exists even to this day. They rose to great heights in maritime commerce and established sophisticated codes of maritime laws.
To meet out the problem of piracy and suppression of the same, the office of the Lord High Admiral and Court of Admiralty were established. This dealt exclusively with maritime disputes and justice in 1360 in England. By the end of the seventeenth century the admiralty jurisdiction in England was restricted, it was not as extensive as compared to other European maritime countries due to a long standing controversy in which the common law courts with the aid of the Parliament had succeeded in limiting the jurisdiction of admiralty to the high seas and as such excluded admiralty jurisdiction from transactions arising on waters within the body of a country.
In India the first Admiralty court was established in The Recorder’s Court at Bombay in 1798, which was substituted by the Supreme Court of Judicature at Bombay In 1823 which had same jurisdiction on its Admiralty side as of High court of Admiralty in England. The Indian High Courts Act was passed by British Parliament in 1961 to abolish the supreme courts and Sadar Adalats and to establish the High Courts in their place. Those were first established at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay.
In the year 1890, Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act, 1890 was enacted and by Act No. 16 of 1891 i.e. Colonial Courts of Admiralty (India) Act, 1891, the High Court of Bombay along with Madras and Calcutta were also declared to be colonial Courts of Admiralty and to regulate their procedure and practice in exercise of admiralty jurisdiction in accordance with the rules made in that behalf.
The High Court of Bombay was declared to be colonial court of admiralty, having same jurisdiction in extent and quality vested in the High Court of England by virtue of any statute or custom.
Article 225 of the constitution Of India and The State Recognition Act, 1956, by which powers conferred by the High Court of Bombay were also made applicable to new High Courts. Admiralty Law is different from Common Laws, but it includes substantial derivations there from. In a suit where, a foreign ship is owned by foreign company who does not have place of resident or business in India is liable to be proceeded against on the admiralty side of the high court by an action in-rem in respect of the cause of action alleged to have arisen by the reason of a tort or a breach of obligation arising from the carriage of goods from a port in India to a foreign court.
The Supreme Court of India after interpreting Article 225 noted that High Courts in India are superior courts of record and they have original and appellate jurisdiction including jurisdiction to determine their own powers, unless expressly or impliedly barred by the Supreme Court. The Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 was subsequently enacted by Indian Parliament which also vested same powers to High Courts in India as of Colonial Courts of Admiralty (India) Act, 1891. The Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 being essentially regulatory in character, the various authorities, tribunals and Courts entru ted with the administration and enforcement of its provisions and also provides a detailed Code of substantive and procedural rules. These rules regulated shipping as an industry and the control exercised over it by the competent authorities in conformity with various international conventions which have, under the auspices of International Organizations such as the IMO (International Maritime Organization) or the ILO (International Labour Organization), unified and developed various aspects of shipping laws. In the landmark cases of M V. Elisabeth v/s Harwan Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd.; Kamlakar v/s The Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd.; Rungta Sons Ltd. v/s Owners and Master of Edison6; National Co. Ltd. v/s M. S. Asia Mariner, the Hon’ble Supreme Court extended the scope and nature of the Admiralty jurisdiction exercised by the High Courts in India and ascertained admiralty jurisdiction and to claims arising out of outbound carriage of goods by sea. It took into account the progress of admiralty jurisdiction the world over both in terms of legislation as well as International Conventions. This decision resulted in the application of the principles of various International Conventions in the maritime arena by Indian courts in exercising admiralty jurisdiction in respect of maritime claims. And stated that “principles of International Conventions are applicable as part of the Indian common law in maritime cases”. With respect to this now Admiralty Courts in India, can arrest ‘sisterships’ in respect of maritime claims.
The Administration of Justice Act, 1920 & 1956, The Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act, 1925 has consolidated and widened the admiralty jurisdiction of High Courts in India. In the course of time the jurisdiction of the High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay, Madras, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa have entertained Admiralty actions.
However, the history as well as the present is proof that maritime law in India is not static and continuously developing; and the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts are very active and responsible for this continued development of the law in this area.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
