CUTTACK: The vacation bench of the Orissa High Court, presided over by Justice MS Raman on Wednesday passed a conditional order for the release of an arrested vessel, MV The Patron (IMO 9481439), subject to deposit of Rs 1.81 crore.
The order was passed in an admiralty suit where the plaintiff filed by Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd has sought refund/restitution of $202,000, equivalent to Rs 1,81,33,540.
The vessel was earlier arrested near Paradip pursuant to a warrant issued by the court on December 26, 2025. During the hearing from 4 pm on Wednesday, counsel for the defendant vessel relied on Rule 38(2) of the Orissa High Court Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Rules, 2020, and submitted that the vessel owner was willing to deposit the entire principal amount claimed in the suit to secure release of the vessel.
It was contended that continued arrest would result in heavy pecuniary loss to the owner, whereas the plaintiff’s claim would remain fully protected by such deposit.
After considering the submissions, Justice Raman directed that if the defendant vessel owner furnishes a demand draft of Rs 1,81,33,540, drawn from any scheduled bank in favour of the registrar (judicial), High Court of Orissa, Cuttack, on or before January 5, 2026, the vessel shall be released forthwith from arrest and permitted to proceed with its voyage.
The Court further ordered that the Registry shall place the deposited amount in an interest-bearing account with a scheduled bank. In the event the plaintiff ultimately succeeds in the suit, the amount along with accrued interest shall be transferred in its favour.
Conversely, if the plaintiff fails, the Registry has been directed to return the entire amount with interest to the applicant-defendant.
MV THE PATRON, according to case records, is at a distance of 5.95 nautical miles off Paradip Port. The vessel under the charter party was required to maintain a speed of 12.5 knots in ballast and 12 knots when laden, but the speed dropped to 7.98 knots, causing delay in reaching the discharge port.
Consequently, the voyage from Khorfakkan to Paradip took about 21.58 days instead of the stipulated 8.58 days, leading to disputes over revised hire rates, bunker calculations and off-hire claims. To avoid further losses and ensure discharge of cargo, the plaintiff claimed it paid $1,82,000 under protest.
The vacation court had ordered arrest of the vessel on December 26, observing that the claim fell within the definition of a maritime claim and the plaintiff appeared to have a genuine grievance.