BRITISH INDIA STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SHANMUGHAVILAS CASHEW INDUSTRIES
LAWS(SC)-1990-3-43
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KERALA)
Decided on March 13,1990

BRITISH INDIA STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
Shanmughavilas Cashew Industries Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

SWATCH LIMITED VS. PRIYA EXHIBITORS PRIVATE LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2007-12-100] [REFERRED TO]
MOSER BAER INDIA LTD VS. KONINKLJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NV [LAWS(DLH)-2008-4-96] [REFERRED TO]
MAX INDIA LTD VS. GENERAL BINDING CORPORATION [LAWS(DLH)-2009-7-38] [REFERRED TO]
RADIANT OVERSEAS PVT LTD VS. INSURANCE REGULATORY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2012-5-106] [REFERRED TO]
SOUTHERN INDIA BEARING DISTRIBUTORS ASSOCIATION VS. NAVLOMOUR [LAWS(MAD)-1991-2-26] [REFERRED TO]
MARCO SHIPPING AGENCY VS. R PIYARELAL INTERNATIONAL [LAWS(CAL)-2008-9-52] [REFERRED TO]
CONTROL PRINT INDIA LIMITED VS. CAB MACHINES [LAWS(BOM)-1997-6-26] [REFERRED TO]
KOHINOOR CARPET MANUFACTURERS VS. FORBES GOKAK LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2001-12-11] [REFERRED TO]
W S G CRICKET PTE LIMITED VS. MODI ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK [LAWS(BOM)-2002-4-113] [REFERRED TO]
RHODIA LIMITED VS. NEON LABORATORIES LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2002-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
WALLACE PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. M V BUNGA BIDARA [LAWS(BOM)-2002-10-69] [REFERRED TO]
BHATINDA CHEMICALS LTD VS. M V X PRESS NUPTSE [LAWS(BOM)-2006-2-43] [REFERRED TO]
KEVIN GEORGE VAZ VS. COTTON TEXTILES EXPORTS PROMOTION COUNCIL [LAWS(BOM)-2006-7-138] [REFERRED TO]
MYTIMASTERS ENGINEERING PVT LTD VS. HEXAGON METROLOGY [LAWS(BOM)-2010-9-97] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMAN PRASAD VS. PRODIGY ELECTRONICS LTD [LAWS(SC)-2007-12-64] [REFERRED TO]
EMMSONS INTERNATIONAL LTD VS. METAL DISTRIBUTORS UK [LAWS(DLH)-2005-1-85] [RELIED 0N]
WORLD TANKER CARRIER CORPORATION VS. SNP SHIPPING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1998-4-52] [RELIED ON]
BRITISH INDIA STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY LIMITED VS. HINDUSTAN CASHEW PRODUCTS LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1990-3-53] [REFERRED TO]
MODI ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK VS. W S G CRICKET PTE LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-2003-1-89] [REFERRED TO]
Kannu Exports VS. Banque Nationale De Paris [LAWS(DLH)-2006-1-43] [REFERRED TO]
KHANIJ EXPORTS P LTD VS. SHIP TRADE INC [LAWS(DLH)-2008-5-352] [REFERRED TO]
R PIYARELAL IMPORT AND EXPORT LTD VS. GLENCORE GRAIN B V [LAWS(CAL)-2010-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
DANMAR LINES REP BY LOCAL AGENTS LEE & MUIRHEAD LTD CHENNAI VS. VESTAS RRB INDIA LTD REP BY ITS POWER AGENT SUBROGEE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD [LAWS(MAD)-2011-11-67] [REFERRED TO]
AMERICAN PRESIDENT LINES LTD VS. AARTI STEELS LIMITED [LAWS(P&H)-1997-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUMBHRI EXPORTS VS. LEIF HEEGH AND CO [LAWS(NCD)-2003-11-24] [REFERRED TO]
ESS DEE CARPET ENTERPRISES VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(NCD)-2006-7-46] [REFERRED]
SNP SHIPPING SERVICES PVT. LTD VS. KARA MARA SHIPPING CO. LTD [LAWS(BOM)-1997-3-77] [REFERRED TO AT PAGE 466 (PARA 16). 4.THE AMALIA (1863) 1 MOORE N.S. 471 PRIVY COUNCIL (PARA 16). 5.]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. TVL ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2011-8-399] [REFERRED TO]
MESSER GRIESHEIM GMBH VS. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2013-11-223] [REFERRED TO]
MSC AGENCY INDIA PVT LTD VS. M/S. GLINTS GLOBAL PTE LTD. [LAWS(MAD)-2014-2-9] [REFERRED TO]
VELLANKI FRAME WORKS, A SOLE PROPRIETORY CONCERN VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CHINAWALTAIR CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM [LAWS(APH)-2014-12-34] [REFERRED TO]
PETRONET LNG LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX [LAWS(CE)-2013-10-42] [REFERRED TO]
ESS DEE CARPET ENTERPRISES VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(RAJCDRC)-2006-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, LONDON BRANCH VS. J C T LIMITED [LAWS(P&H)-2015-1-387] [REFERRED TO]
LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD. VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2015-9-16] [REFERRED TO]
TRAXPO ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. VS. KOLMAR GROUP AG [LAWS(BOM)-2016-4-139] [REFERRED TO]
OWNERS AND PERSONS INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL VS. KTV HEALTH FOOD PVT LTD. [LAWS(MAD)-2014-12-370] [REFERRED TO]
JAYPEE EXPORTS LTD. VS. EVERGREEN MARINE COPORATION [LAWS(NCD)-2004-3-291] [REFERRED TO]
ICICI BANK LTD VS. CHOUDHARY RAJNI & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2016-5-816] [REFERRED]
ASSOBHAI BHANJI AND SONS VS. GREAT CIRCLE SHIPPING PVT LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2017-8-244] [REFERRED TO]
M.V.NICOLAOS VS. INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS COOPERATIVE [LAWS(GJH)-2017-9-118] [REFERRED TO]
GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2019-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
DHOLI SPINTEX PVT. LTD. VS. LOUIS DREYFUS COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-25] [REFERRED TO]
NORTRANS MARINE SERVICES (P) LTD VS. CARGO CARE INTERNATIONAL [LAWS(KER)-2020-11-194] [REFERRED TO]
SAHASTRAA EXPORTS PVT. LTD VS. AP MOLLER - MAERSK A/S [LAWS(BOM)-2022-5-96] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Respondent 1 M/s Hanmughavilas Cashew Industries, Quilon purchased from East Africa 350 tons of raw cashewnuts which were shipped in the vessel SS Steliosm chartered by the appellant M/s British India Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. , incorporated in England, pursuant to a contract of affreightment evidenced by 3 bills of lading issued to the shipper for the 3 loads of cashewnuts. Out of 4445 bags containing the nuts carried in the said vessel only 3712 bags were delivered at Cochin, there being thus short landing of 733 bags.
(2.)Respondent 1 sued the appellant in Suit No. O. S. 18 of 1965 in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Cochin seeking damages for the shortage of 733 bags of raw cashewnuts amounting to Rs. 44,438. 03. The suit having been decreed with interest 6 per cent per annum from 17/07/1964, for the sum total of Rs. 46,659.93, the appellant preferred therefrom appeal AS. No. 365 of 1969 in the High court of Kerala which was pleased by its judgments and decree dated August 16, 1973 and 30/11/1973, to dismiss the appeal and affirm that of the Subordinate Judge. Aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal by special leave.
(3.)In the courts below the main contentions of the appellant, inter alia, were that it was a mere charterer of the vessel which was owned by S. Matas and Company c/o Lucas Matas and Sons, Piraeus, Greece; that there was a charterparty executed between respondent 1 and M/s Victorial Steamship Company as agents of the said owner of the vessel in London on 27/01/1964; that as per clause 3 of the bill of lading the court at Cochin had no jurisdiction and only English courts had jurisdiction; and that as per the charterparty and clause 4 of the bill of lading the remedy of respondent I, if any, was against the owner who alone was liable and not against the appellant charterer of the vessel. Exhibit D-l is the photostat copy of the charterparty concluded in London on 27/01/1964 and Exs. P-l to P-3 are the 3 bills of lading in the transaction. Respondent 1 denied that the appellant was only a charterer and not liable for the shortage. It also denied that only English courts had jurisdiction in the matter.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.