1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.588 OF 2008 IN ADMIRALTY SUIT NO.5 OF 2006 Premier Explosives Ltd. & Anr. .. Plaintiffs versus M.V. Eugenia .. Defendant ... Mr.Manoj Khatri for the plaintiffs. Mr.V.K. Rambhadran for applicant in support of chamber summons. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 12th June 2008 P.C.: 1. This Chamber Summons is taken out by the applicant for permission to intervene. 2. The plaintiff who has a maritime claim 2 against the defendant no.1 vessel has filed a suit for recovery of the maritime claim. I am informed at the bar that the defendant no.1 vessel has since been sold and the sale proceeds are kept with the Prothonotary and Sr. Master. 3. The applicant - proposed intervenor claims that he also has a maritime claim against the defendant no.1 vessel. He has filed a suit, being Admiralty suit no.14 of 2007, against the defendant no.1 vessel for the recovery of its maritime claim. A copy of the plaint in Admiralty suit no.14 of 2007 is annexed to the Chamber Summons. 4. Rule 949 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules relating to Admiralty Jurisdiction reads as follows :- 949(1) Where property against which a suit in rem is brought is under arrest or money representing the proceeds of sale of that property is in Court, a person who has interest in that property or money but who is not a defendant to the suit may, with the leave of the Judge, intervene in the suit. 3 (2) An application for the grant of leave under this rule may be made ex-parte by affidavit showing the interest of the applicant in the property against which the suit is brought or in the money in Court. (3) A person to whom leave is granted to intervene in a suit shall file an appearance in person or a vakalatnama therein within the period specified in the order granting leave. On filing such appearance or vakalatnama, the intervener shall be treated as if he were a defendant in the suit. (4) The Judge may order that a person to whom he grants leave to intervene in a suit, shall, within such period as may be specified in the order, serve on every other party to the suit such pleadings as may be so specified. The rule says that where a property against which a suit in rem is brought is under arrest or money representing the proceeds of sale of that property is 4 in Court, a person interested in the property or money but who is not a defendant in the suit, may with the leave of the Judge, intervene in the suit. 5. Where several persons have a maritime claim against a vessel and the total claims against the vessel, exceed the value of the vessel, obviously the sale proceeds of the vessel may be required to be distributed proportionately, subject to the priorities, if any, claimed by any of the parties under law. It is in these circumstances that every person who has a maritime claim against a vessel is interested in not only proving his own claim but may be interested in disproving the claims of others to get better share in the sale proceeds of the vessel. In my view, therefore, each person having a claim should be allowed to intervene. Rule 949 permits him to do so subject to the leave of the court. 6. In view of the fact that the intervenor claims to have a maritime claim against the defendant vessel it would be appropriate to grant him leave to intervene in the matter. 7. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also did not seriously contest right of the applicant to intervene in the matter. 5 8. In the circumstances, Chamber Summons is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). It is further directed that the intervenor shall file his pleadings if any, within eight weeks and serve a copy of the pleadings on the plaintiff, the defendant and as also on other persons, if any, who are allowed to intervene. The necessary amendment shall be carried out within four weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J)