Disposed

Dan Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd. v. Mv Silvia Glory (Imo 9622942

Gujarat HC18 Jul 2022AS/8/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat disposed of Admiralty Suit No. 8 of 2019 as withdrawn. On consent of parties via a Settlement Agreement, the court directed remittance of USD 35,000 to the plaintiff and refund of the balance security deposited with accrued interest to the vessel owner.

What did the court decide?

Suit dismissed as withdrawn; Registry directed to remit USD 35,000 to Plaintiff and balance security with interest to Vessel Owner.

Dan Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd. Vs Mv Silvia Glory (Imo 9622942 — Gujarat HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/ADMIRALTY SUIT NO. 8 of 2019

¶4

================================================== DAN BUNKERING (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD

¶5

Versus

¶6

MV SILVIA GLORY (IMO 9622942

¶7

================================================== Appearance:

¶8

MS PAURAMI B. SHETH(841) for the Plaintiff(s) No. 1 SHASHVATA U SHUKLA(8069) for the Defendant(s) No. 1

¶9

==================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

¶11

Date : 18/07/2022

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

Heard Ms. Paurami Sheth, learned advocate

¶14

for the plaintiff and Mr. Shashvata Shukla, learnd advocate for the Defendant.

¶15

Learned advocates for the parties have filed a joint Purshish dated 18.07.2022 and the Settlement Agreement dated 09.06.2022 duly signed by the respective parties and prayed to pass appropriate orders in terms of the

¶16

said Purshish. The said purshish and Settlement Agreement are ordered to be taken on record.

¶17

Page 1 of 11

¶18

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

¶19

THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (the “ Agreement ”) is made as on 9 June 2022 (the “ Settlement Date ”) between:

¶20

(1) Best Excellence Corporation Ltd , with its registered office at 19/F, on Hong Kong Commercial Building, 145 Hennessy Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong (“ Owners ”), registered owners of the vessel M.V. Silvia Glory (the “ Vessel” ); and

¶21

(2) Dan Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd. ,with its office at 8 Shenton Way, #50-01, AXA Tower, Singapore 068811(“ DB ”)

¶22

together the “ Parties ” and individually a “ Party ”.

¶23

WHEREAS:

¶24

A. It is Owner’s case that the Vessel was time chartered by the Owners to Lianyi Shipping Ltd. (“ Lianyi ”) on 07.02.2018. Lianyi as Time Charterers (through its agent Bo Hai Marine Co. Ltd.) arranged for 600 MT of IFO 380 CST (“ Bunkers ”) from DB to be supplied to the Vessel.

¶25

B. On 07.06.2018, DB through their physical suppliers, China Marine Bunker Lianyungang Co.Ltd. supplied bunkers to the Vessel. On 13.06.2018, DB raised their invoice No. INV1806038 for USD 289,800. (“ Invoice ”)

¶26

C. It is DB’s case that DB’s invoice remained unpaid. On 05.02.2019, DB filed an Admiralty Suit No. 8 of 2019, against the Vessel (the “ Suit ”) in the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad (the “ Court ”) for recovery of the unpaid Invoice plus interest and costs amounting to a total of USD 409,105 plus further interest at the rate of 2% p.m. (the “ Suit Claim ”) and sought the arrest of the Vessel. Pursuant to the Arrest Order dated 06.02.2019 passed by the Court, the Vessel was arrested in the Suit.

¶27

D. On 21.09.2021, the Owners (through Farenco Shipping Pte Ltd.) deposited an amount of USD 415,105 (the “ Security Amount ”) in the Court as security for the Suit claim. By an Order dated 26.02.2019, the Gujarat High Court permitted the Vessel to be released, subject to receipt of the Security Amount by the Registry.

¶28

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶29

E. Parties have agreed on their own free will and without any admission of liability for an irrevocable settlement of the dispute under the Suit on a full and final basis and without prejudice to Parties right and contentions with respect to the dispute under the Suit.

¶30

NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE AGREEMENT, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

¶31

Owners agree to pay a sum of USD 35,000 (United States Dollars Thirty-Five Thousand (“ Settlement Amount ”) to DB, in full and final settlement of all Suit claim and any other claims, demands, proceedings or cause of action in respect of, arising out of or in connection with the supply of Bunkers or Invoice for the Bunkers whether in India or any other jurisdiction in the world.

¶32

Within 7 days from the execution of this Settlement Agreement, both DB and Owners will accordingly move suitable joint application(s) (known as purshis) before the Gujarat High Court for withdrawal of the Suit and disbursement of Security Amount as recorded herein below and obtain an order recording withdrawal of the Suit and consequent disposal of the Suit and all related proceedings.

¶33

Subject to fulfilment of Clause 2 above, the Settlement Amount of USD 35,000 shall be paid to DB in the below account details from the Security Amount deposited by Owners with the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court.

¶34

Beneficiary Name	Dan-Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd
Beneficiary A/c No.	2016210055
Bank Name	Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore Branch
Bank Address	One Raffles Quay, #16-00, South Tower 048583 Singapore
Swift Code	DEUTSGSGXXX

¶35

Along with and at the time of remittance of the Settlement Amount, the balance Security Amount along with accrued

¶36

Page 3 of 11

¶37

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶38

interest, to be paid to Owner’s nominee Farenco Shipping Pte Ltd. (in the bank account mentioned below) or as ordered by the Court:

¶39

Bank Name and Address	BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS CO LTD HONG KONG BRANCH
Beneficiary Name	FARENCO SHIPPING PTE LTD
Beneficiary Address	20 PEDDER STREET, CENTRAL, HONG KONG
Beneficiary USD A/C Number	027-841-101167-8-01
Bank SWIFT	COMMHKHH

¶40

DB and their lawyers will assist Owners’ and their lawyers for release/remittance of the Security Amount deposited in the Court (along with any interest accrued until remittance) to the Owner’s nominee Farenco Shipping Pte Ltd., as per clause 4 above.

¶41

DB and Owners shall assist each other for filing of the Settlement Agreement before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and other applications for release and remittance of the Security Amount (along with any interest accrued until remittance) and withdrawal of the Suit.

¶42

In consideration of the above, DB (i) accepts, declares and undertakes that, on condition that the Settlement Amount is duly paid, all claims regarding the supply of Bunkers have been irrevocably settled and fully paid, no additional amount of compensation and no other paid and/or unpaid claim or lien including interest, attorney fees, litigation costs or any other claim, arising out of supply of the Bunkers remaining outstanding; and (ii)irrevocably and completely releases and discharges the Owners, including but not limited to, its agents, directors, shareholders, employees, representative, crew, operators, Protection and Indemnity Club Associations, underwriters / insurers, Master of the Vessel and the Vessel (“ Released Parties ”) from all claims, demands, liabilities, indemnities, actions, legal proceedings, set offs or suits, arising out of or related, directly or indirectly, with the supply of Bunkers. Parties, both DB and Owners hereby irrevocably accept and declare that they have waived any and all their rights arising out or in connection with the supply of Bunkers and

¶43

Page 4 of 11

¶44

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶45

any/all legal proceedings, execution proceedings, arbitration cases, court cases both commenced and/or to be commenced arising out of or related, directly or indirectly, with the supply of Bunkers, against the Released Parties in any jurisdiction.

¶46

If any provision of the present Settlement Agreement (or part thereof) is or becomes illegal, invalid or unenforceable under applicable law or regulation, but would be legal, valid and enforceable if the clause or some part of it was deleted or modified (or the duration of the relevant clause reduced), the relevant clause (or part thereof) will apply with such deletion or modification as may be required to make it legal, valid and enforceable, and Parties will promptly and in good faith seek to immediately negotiate a replacement provision consistent with the original intent of the Settlement Agreement.

¶47

Nothing contained in this Settlement Agreement is intended to create any rights, entitlements, claims or benefits enforceable by any person that is not a party to it. Accordingly, no person shall derive any benefit or have any right, entitlement or claim in relation to this Agreement by virtue of the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999.

¶48

Nothing in this Settlement Agreement is or shall be construed or deemed to be an admission towards any matter in respect of or arising out of the dispute under the Suit. The Settlement Agreement is without prejudice to Parties rights and contentions in respect of the dispute under the Suit all of which are reserved.

¶49

This Settlement Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which, when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Signature of this Settlement Agreement transmitted by e-mail, pdf or by any other electronic means will be deemed valid and binding to the same extent as original signature.

¶50

Parties agree that the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement, and the substance of all negotiations in connection with it, are strictly private and confidential to Parties, their officers, directors, employees, shareholders, contractors, affiliates, financiers, lenders, professional advisors, including financial and legal advisors, agents or representatives who shall not disclose them to, or otherwise communicate or divulge them

¶51

Page 5 of 11

¶52

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶53

to, any third parties without the written consent of the other Party, save for their legal advisors or other professional advisors, auditors or insurers, on terms which preserve confidentiality, and save to the extent that they are under a legal or regulatory obligation to do so (including of a stock exchange), and in so far as necessary to implement and enforce any of the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement.

¶54

The Settlement Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties regarding the subject matter of the Agreement and supersedes any prior agreements, representations or understandings between them, whether in writing or oral, in respect of its subject matter unless expressly incorporated by reference in the Agreement.

¶55

No amendment or variation to the Settlement Agreement will be valid unless agreed in writing by an authorised signatory of each Party.

¶56

The undersigned warrant that they are duly authorised to enter into and sign this Settlement Agreement on behalf of the respective Parties on whose behalf they sign.

¶57

This Settlement Agreement is governed, subject to and shall be construed in accordance with English law. Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Contract shall be referred to arbitration in London in accordance with the Arbitration Act 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment. The seat of the arbitration shall be England. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA) Terms current at the time when the arbitration proceedings are commenced.

¶58

IN WITNESS WHEREOF , Parties have entered into the Agreement on the Settlement Date

¶59

Best Excellence Corporation Ltd.	Dan Bunkering Singapore (Pte) Ltd.
Signed by: ______________ Title: __________________	Signed by: Mr. Raju Desai Title: Authorised Signatory

¶60

Page 6 of 11

¶61

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶62

2. The Joint Purshish dated 18.07.2022 reads thus:

¶63

“The Plaintiff had filed aforesaid suit interalia for arrest of the Defendant vessel. By an order dated 06.02.2019, this Hon'ble Court granted arrest of the Defendant Vessel. Upon service, the Defendant Vessel has entered appearance through its Advocate, tendered security of USD 415,105 (“Security Amount”) and got the Defendant Vessel released vide an order dated 26.02.2019. Subsequently, an application, being OJCA No. 1 of 2019 was filed on behalf of the Respondent/ Org. Defendant Vessel, inter alia, seeking that the Order of arrest be vacated and the Security Amount be refunded. By an Order dated 21.08.2020, this Hon'ble Court vacated the Order of Arrest dated 06.02.2019 and directed refund of the Security Amount along with interest accrued. Thereafter, an appeal, being O.J. Appeal No. 6 of 2020 was filed by the Plaintiff against the Order dated 21.08.2020 which is pending.

¶64

The Plaintiff and Best Excellence Corporation Ltd., being the Owner of the Defendant Vessel have amicably resolvedall disputes. On 9^th June 2022, parties have executed a Settlement Agreement, by which the Owner of the Respondent / Org. Defendant Vessel has agreed to pay a sum of USD 35,000 ("Settlement Amount") to the Plaintiff, inter alia, in full and final settlement of all Suit claim. The Plaintiff therefore, does not want to proceed further with this Suit. Copies of the counterparts of the settlement Agreement executed by the respective party is produce herewith.

¶65

Furthermore, as per the said Settlement Agreement, parties have agreed that execution of the same, parties will move a suitable joint application before this Hon'ble Court for withdrawal of the Suit and disbursement of Security Amount. Parties have also agreed that once the Suit is withdrawn, the Settlement Amount of USD 35,000 will be paid to the Plaintiff. At the same time and along with remittance of the Settlement Amount to the Appellant / Org. Plaintiff, the balance Security Amount along with accrued interest will be paid to the bank account nominated by the Owner of the Defendant Vessel.

¶66

Hence, parties pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass appropriate orders for disposal of the Suit as withdrawn unconditionally (along with 0.J. Appeal No. 6 of 2020 and all

¶67

Page 7 of 11

¶68

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶69

related applications) without effective hearing, directing the Registry to-

¶70

(a) Remit the Settlement Amount of USD 35,000 to the Plaintiff to its designated bank account as provided below-

¶71

Beneficiary Name	Dan-Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd
Beneficiary A/c	2016210055
No.
Bank Name	Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore Branch
Bank Address	One Raffles Quay, #16-00, South Tower
	048583 Singapore
Swift Code	DEUTSGSGXXX

¶72

(b) Remit the balance Security Amount along with accrued interest to the designated bank account of the Owner of the Respondent / Orig. Defendant Vessel as provided below:

¶73

Bank Name and Address	BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS CO LTD HONG KONG BRANCH
Beneficiary Name	FARENCO SHIPPING PTE LTD
Beneficiary	20 PEDDER STREET, CENTRAL,
Address	HONG KONG
Beneficiary USD	027-841-101167-8-01
A/C Number
Bank SWIFT	COMMHKHH

¶74

¶75

Dated this 18^th day of July, 2022 at Ahmedabad.”

¶76

It is stated in the said Joint Purshish that the Defendant

¶77

Vessel has tendered security of USD 415,105 and got the Defendant Vessel released vide an order dated

¶78

26.02.2019, that subsequently the Defendant Vessel filed

¶79

Page 8 of 11

¶80

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶81

Application for vacating Arrest and return of the security amount being OJCA No. 1 of 2019, that by an Order dated 21.08.2020, this Court vacated the Order of Arrest granted vide order dated 06.02.2019 and directed refund of the Security Amount along with interest accrued, that against the said order, the plaintiff has filed an appeal, being O.J. Appeal No. 6 of 2020 which is pending.

¶82

The learned advocates appearing for the parties have submitted that the parties have amicably resolved all disputes and have executed a Settlement Agreement dated 09.06.2022 under which the owner of the defendant Vessel has agreed to pay a sum of USD 35,000 to the plaintiff, inter alia, in full and final settlement of all Suit claim, the plaintiff has to receive the said amount for security amount lying with the Registry and withdraw the aforesaid Suit and the defendant has to receive the balance amount with accrued interest thereon in their bank account. The learned advocates further submitted to pass appropriate orders in terms of the Purshish and Settlement Agreement.

¶83

Page 9 of 11

¶84

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶85

In view of the Purshish and submissions, the above suit is disposed of as withdrawn without gone into the merits

¶86

of the matter.

¶87

The registry is directed to remit the amount of USD 35,000 to the plaintiff in its following designated account

¶88

within 2 weeks form date of this order:

¶89

Beneficiary	Dan-Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd
Name
Beneficiary A/c	2016210055
No.
Bank Name	Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore Branch
Bank Address	One Raffles Quay, #16-00, South
	Tower
	048583 Singapore
Swift Code	DEUTSGSGXXX

¶90

The Registry is further directed to remit the balance

¶91

security amount along with accrued interest to the following designated bank account of the Owner of the defendant Vessel within 2 weeks from the date of this order.

¶92

Page 10 of 11

¶93

C/AS/8/2019 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2022

¶94

Bank Name and	BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS
Address	CO LTD HONG KONG BRANCH
Beneficiary Name	FARENCO SHIPPING PTE LTD
Beneficiary Address	20 PEDDER STREET, CENTRAL,
	HONG KONG
Beneficiary USD A/	027-841-101167-8-01
C Number
Bank SWIFT	COMMHKHH

¶95

In view of above, Ms. Paurami Sheth, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff seeks permission to withdraw the present Admiralty Suit.

¶96

The permission, as prayed for, is granted.

¶97

The Registry is directed to refund permissible court fees

¶98

in the name of advocate of the plaintiff. Direct service is permitted.

¶99

As the main Admiralty Suit is disposed of, as withdrawn,

¶100

the connected Civil Application(s) also stand(s) disposed of, accordingly.

¶101

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)

¶102

Pradhyuman

¶103

Page 11 of 11

Dan Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd. v. Mv Silvia Glory (Imo 9622942

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dan Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd. v. Mv Silvia Glory (Imo 9622942

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Vs Ol of M/S Essen Computers Ltd.

Ol of M/S Umiya Ceramic Pvt. Ltd. (in Liqn) Vs Rameshbhai Tapubhai Bhoraniya

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs State of Gujarat

Patel Jayeshbhai Chhotabhai Vs Election Officer, Ashish Miyatra

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Vs State of Gujarat

Axis Bank Limited Vs State of Gujarat