| Case ID |
2663cfd4-eb31-4085-8484-c446d490a33a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Admiralty Appeals Nos. 2 and 3 of 1999 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 13, 2002 |
| Hearing Date |
Nov 07, 2000 |
| Decision |
The court upheld the findings of the learned Single Judge, affirming that a seaman is entitled to claim wages only until the termination of his services as defined by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1923. The case involved the determination of the date when the appellant, Sikandar, ceased to be a member of the crew, following the sale of the vessel under a court order. The court concluded that the appellant's services were terminated upon signing off from the Articles of Agreement, and he was entitled to wages only up to the date of sale of the vessel, which was confirmed on May 9, 1996. The appeals by both parties were dismissed, and the decision reinforces the legal principles regarding the rights of seamen and the necessary procedures for signing off from service. |
| Summary |
In the case of Admiralty Appeals Nos. 2 and 3 of 1999, heard by the Sindh High Court, the primary issue revolved around the entitlements of a seaman named Sikandar in relation to wages following the sale of the vessel he was employed on. The court examined the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1923, particularly sections 42, 43, 44, 46, and 47, which delineate the rights and responsibilities of seamen regarding wage claims and discharge from service. The judgment emphasized that a seaman's claim for wages is limited to the period of actual service, concluding that Sikandar was entitled to wages only until the sale of the vessel on May 9, 1996. The ruling highlighted the importance of adhering to statutory requirements for signing off from Articles of Agreement, which is crucial for determining the end of a seaman's service. This case serves as a significant reference for maritime law, particularly in the context of wage claims and the legal standing of seamen in the face of vessel sales, ensuring that their rights are protected while also preventing potential exploitation. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI,
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBUTLAH SIDDIQUI
|
| Lawyers |
Mr. Agha Faqir Muhammad,
Mr. Muhammad Arif
|
| Petitioners |
Sikandar
|
| Respondents |
CIT GROUP/CAPITAL EQUIPMENT FINANCING INC.
|
| Citations |
2002 SLD 2469,
2002 PLD 395
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Merchant Shipping Act,
Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance
|
| Sections |
42,
43,
44,
46,
47,
28,
7
|