Sections 4 and 57 of Pakistan Merchant Shipping Ordinance (LII of 2001), Section 17 benefited from the arrest on the short landing ship of the shipment, In the special and common law plaintiff the plaintiff demanded the arrest of two ships instead of the ship. There was a reason against The prosecution and it was alleged that the defendant was the beneficial owner of the vessel for the capture of the ship that he should gain in beneficial ownership, as the majority of the shares are respected by the person against whom the claim itself. Such test of beneficial ownership of the majority of the shares was required for a sister ship was established for the Ordinance of the High Courts, the provisions of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of 1980, was a special law and the Pakistan Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 2001 It cannot be ignored by the Common Law of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Section 557 of the High Courts Has provisions. In the 1980 Ordinance, only beneficial interest was mentioned and no defendant could be arrested on the ship of a beneficiary owner, thus no such provision was applicable. The question of short landing of the matter was disputed. There was a case that needed to be established through evidence and therefore the offender's owner was included in the admiralty suit as a defendant. This aspect of the case can be decided after the parties have headed the evidence when the plaintiff failed to present a case for the arrest of the ship and a single High Court judge arrested the High Court's ship division bench. The application was refused to properly interfere. An order passed by a single High Court judge
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
