https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288113 The Bombay HC held that the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 did not oust admiralty jurisdiction in a bank's action in rem against a vessel and its owners, because the Act's general bar did not expressly exclude the special maritime remedy preserved under Article 225 and supported by the constitutional allocation of admiralty power. It also held that territorial jurisdiction existed where part of the maritime cause of action arose within Bombay, since the mortgage, guarantee, advance, and repayment arrangements were made there. The preliminary objections were therefore rejected and the Court proceeded with the admiralty suit. en-us Thu, 03 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2020 18:17:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288113 The Bombay HC held that the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 did not oust admiralty jurisdiction in a bank's action in rem against a vessel and its owners, because the Act's general bar did not expressly exclude the special maritime remedy preserved under Article 225 and supported by the constitutional allocation of admiralty power. It also held that territorial jurisdiction existed where part of the maritime cause of action arose within Bombay, since the mortgage, guarantee, advance, and repayment arrangements were made there. The preliminary objections were therefore rejected and the Court proceeded with the admiralty suit. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 03 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288113