Admiralty Jurisdiction — Commercial Courts Act — Withdrawal of Suit — Court Fee Refund
A. Admiralty suit — Arrest of vessel — Settlement — Withdrawal
Where parties to an admiralty commercial suit amicably resolve their dispute and the entire claim amount is paid, the plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the suit and the Court may permit such withdrawal and dismiss the suit as withdrawn.
(Paras 1–5)
B. Arrest order — Effect of withdrawal of suit
Once the commercial suit is dismissed as withdrawn, the interim arrest order passed against the vessel becomes infructuous and is liable to be vacated, enabling the vessel to sail from port.
(Para 6)
C. Refund of court fee — Suit withdrawn after settlement
Upon withdrawal of a suit on settlement between parties, the plaintiff is entitled to refund of the court fee deposited along with the plaint.
(Paras 7–8)
D. Court fee refund — Governing precedents
Refund of court fee upon withdrawal is permissible in terms of the decisions in:
• Polyprint Private Limited v. Canara Bank
• M. Dasarath v. K. Omprakash
• P & H Vaswani (P) Limited v. G.S. Murthy
(Para 7)
FINAL ORDER
• Commercial Suit No.1 of 2026 dismissed as withdrawn
• Arrest order dated 15-01-2026 vacated
• Refund of court fee of ₹2,01,267/- directed within four weeks
• No order as to costs
(Paras 5–8)
ANALYSIS OF FACTS
1. Nature of proceedings
• Admiralty Commercial Suit under the jurisdiction of the High Court
• Plaintiff: Oilmar DMCC, UAE-based company
• Defendant No.1: M.V. Hoanh Son Universe (Panama-flag vessel)
2. Claim in the suit
Plaintiff sought:
• Recovery of USD 440,121.55
• Arrest and detention of vessel
• Sale of vessel if security not furnished
• Injunction restraining vessel from sailing
3. Interim order
• Vessel was arrested by order dated 15-01-2026 passed in I.A. No.1 of 2026.
4. Subsequent developments
• Parties entered into amicable settlement
• Entire suit claim amount of USD 440,121.55 paid on 16-01-2026
5. Applications filed
| I.A. | Relief |
|---|---|
| I.A. No.3/2026 | Permission to withdraw suit and vacate arrest |
| I.A. No.4/2026 | Refund of court fee ₹2,01,267/- |
ANALYSIS OF LAW
1. Withdrawal of commercial suit
The Court held that:
• Dispute stood fully resolved
• Entire claim amount had been paid
• No lis survived for adjudication
Hence, withdrawal of the commercial suit was permitted.
(Paras 4–5)
2. Effect on admiralty arrest
The arrest order was purely interlocutory and dependent on pendency of the suit.
Once the suit was withdrawn:
• The arrest order automatically lost its substratum
• It became infructuous
Accordingly, the order dated 15-01-2026 was vacated.
(Para 6)
3. Refund of court fee
The Court applied settled precedents of the High Court holding that:
• When a suit is withdrawn after settlement
• Court fee paid with the plaint must be refunded
The entitlement flows not from discretion, but from binding judicial precedent.
(Paras 7–8)
4. Time-bound direction
Registry was directed:
• To refund ₹2,01,267/-
• Within four (04) weeks from the date of order
(Para 8)
RATIO DECIDENDI
The binding legal principle laid down is:
When an admiralty commercial suit is withdrawn pursuant to amicable settlement after full satisfaction of the claim amount, the Court is justified in permitting withdrawal of the suit, vacating the arrest order passed against the vessel as infructuous, and directing refund of the court fee deposited with the plaint in accordance with settled precedents of the High Court.
