LAW RELATING TO MARITIME WRECKS IN INDIA.

The problems from wreck are three fold. First, and

Depending on its location, a wreck may constitute a hazard to
navigation, potentially endangering other vessels and theirs
crews; second, and of equal concern, depending on the
nature of the cargo, is the potential for a wreck to
envoirments; and third, in an age where goods and services
are becoming increasingly expensive, is the issue of the costs
involved in the marking and removal of hazardous wrecks.

Jurisdiction:

Indian law with respect to wreck is laid down in part XIII of

the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and in the Indian Ports Act,
1908. Indian Ports Act, 1908 is limited to the `port’ or ‘limits
of the Port’ & cannot be effectively used to deal with wrecks
beyond the port limits.

The Indian merchant Shipping act ,1958 defines wreck in an

inclusive manner so as to take in both goods and vessels
.these goods or vessels are to be found either in the sea or in
tidal waters or on shores .The term sea has not been defined
in the Act and hence will have to be understood as envisage
in the Indian Maritime Zones Act. Since the Act does not have
extraterritorial application the same will not be applicable to
the wreck in the high coast along the Indian Coast. So sea has
to be understood as 12 nautical miles territorial sea
measured from the base lines.
The term Tidal waters has been defined in the Act to mean
any part of the sea and any part of the river within ebb and
flow of the tide at ordinary spring tides and not being a
harbor. Interestingly after having specifically laid down that
wreck has to be in the sea or in tidal waters or on shores Part
XIII of the Act dealing with wreck and salvage brings in the
concept of Coast to denote the territorial limit wherein the
wreck can be situated. Coast has been defined in an inclusive
manner to include the coast of creeks and tidal rivers[Sec
391]Thus territorial limit where a wreck can be located as per
the Act are the sea or tidal waters or on shores or in the
Coast

Under UNCLOS, the territorial limits within which the state

can take measure for removal of wreck has been specifically
demarcated and termed as the Convention area which takes
in the whole of the Exclusively Economics Zone i.e. 200
nautical miles from base line .Such a precise adoption of the
area of operation appears to be beneficial and clears off
much confusion created by synonymous and ambiguous
terms. At the same time it is relevant for handling wrecks,
the Act by mentioning shores also takes care of those wrecks
or part of it that floats and are washed off on to the land
along the coast. Recent events have however shown that the
most of the wrecks actually exist or shipping casualties occur
, within the maritime zone of India outside the limit of port
,an area wherein the provisions of the Indian Ports Act are
not applicable.
The term goods have been left nebulous and the Act has not
attempted to qualify or confine it to maritime property. So it
has to be construed in the wide sense as used in the common
parlance. But as to constitute a wreck under the Act, goods
have to be those that had been cast into the sea which then
sinks and remain under water, or which has been cast or
fallen into the sea or remain floating on the surface, which
are sunk on the sea but are attached to a floating object in
the order that they may be found again or those which have
been thrown away or abandoned. The term vessel under the
Act includes any ship, boat, sailing vessel or other description
of vessel used in navigation which has been abandoned
without hope or intention of recovery. Thus abandonment is
a prerequisite for a vessel to be treated as a wreck. This
leaves a question whether a vessel that is about, or may
reasonably be expected, to sink or to strand, where effective
measures to assist the vessel in danger are not already being
taken can be termed as a wreck under Indian Law. The
insistence on total abandonment without even a hope or
intention of recovery clearly shows that a stranded vessel or
a vessel that is reasonably expected to sink cannot be termed
as a Wreck under the Act.

Recognizing the fact that wreck is a property of importance

which requires to be dealt with systematically and which by
its nature tends to remain uncounted ‘nobody’s property’ in
view of liabilities that would arise out of the same, the Act
provides that the Central Government may appoint a receiver
to receive and take possession of the section ( SEC. 391).
This provision ensures that receiver thus appointed has been
empowered to delegate his powers to any person if so
required [Sec.391 (2)].

From the said provision it is apparent that the receiver of

wreck is an authority appointed for different areas as
specified in the notification and is a regular official and is not
appointed at the time of happening of a maritime casually or
upon the formation of wreck. The said function are
performed by the concerned officer of Merchant Marine
Department from the local MMD station. The Act mandates
the Receiver of wreck within whose limit the place is situated
shall upon request from the Master of vessel stranded or
distress and upon being acquainted with the circumstances
forth while proceed to the place and upon arrival shall take
command of the situation and take steps for the preservation
of the vessel, its cargo and its equipment and the lives of
person on the board. For the said equipment and the lives of
person on the board. For the said purpose he has the right to
take command of all person present, to the assign such
duties and such direction to each person he thinks as a fit[Sec
392].

IT is relevant to note that vessel in distress and which has

been taken command f by a receiver is not a wreck in the
sense it has been defined in the Act. It has to be abandoned
without hope of intention of recovery It would be erroneous
to say that when a request is made by a of vessel in the
distress to a receiver to intervene and help, the same has to
be treated as an abandonment of vessel without hope of
intention of recovery and hence a wreck. So there has to be
positive Act of abandonment so as to constitute a wreck and
to empower the receiver to meddle with the same, without
which, service rendered by the receiver to the vessel in
distress at the most could only be treated as the salvage Act
which, the, which may or may not entitle him to claim
salvage contribution.

THE status also confers on the receiver certain powers

incidental to and necessary for effective performance of his
duties like power to pass over adjoining land for the purpose
of rendering assistance [Sec393], power to suppress plunder
and disorder by force[Sec 394],power to investigate into
relevant aspects’ leading to the wreck like occasions for
wrecking[Sec396],power to make immediate sale of
wreck[Sec398]power to make the Magistrate for issuance of
search warrant where wreck is concealed[Sec 401], etc
.,elaboration which, the, which may or may not entitle him to
claim salvage contribution whereof may not be relevant to
the purpose of the articles.

When the foreign vessel is rendered wreck along the Indian

coast threatening the navigation as well as the coastal
environment, the situation throws up numerous legal issue
which the law as it stands now is ill equipped to deal with. As
seen here in above, under the Act so as to constitute a wreck
has to be a valid abandonment. A decision to abandon a
vessel by its Master as the representative of the Master as
the representative of the owner will be a well thought out
decision and after once having abandoned, the owner would
be reluctant to claim the wreck is so far as expenses for
Removal will overweigh the value of received wreck.
So the vessel in many cases will remained unclaimed wreck
and if it is a threat a task of removal might fall on the soldier
of coastal state .Hence the need for legal apparatus for
compulsory removal of wreck.

The Act mandates that any position that the person finding
and taking possession of wreck shall as soon as practicable, if
he is the owner of the wreck give notice to thereof to the
receiver stating the distinguishing marks and if is not the
owner deliver the same to the receiver[Sec395].The receiver
in turn after taking possession of the wreck should punish a
notification containing a description of wreck and time and
place where it was found[Sec 397].Though certain penalties
are laid down in the Act for violating the notice requirement,
fine of paltry sum of 1000 rupees is not adequate to meet the
consequence arising from a wreck or even a twice the value
of wreck for the matter may prove a inadequate[Sec346(117
to 120(b)]
With reference to the claims of the owner of wreck to the
satisfaction of the receiver within one year of wreck coming
into the possession of the receiver, he shall be entitled to
have the wreck or the proceeds thereof to delivered to him
upon his paying the salvage and other charges[Sec
399(1)].Obviously the receiver satisfaction has to be
objectively arrived at after due process and complying with
the principle of natural justice.

In the case of foreign vessel if its wreck or cargos are found

or near the Indian coast or are brought to any Indian port, in
the absence of master/owner ,the statue mandates that
 The counselor officer of the country in which the vessel is
registered or the cargo owner belongs ,shall be deemed to be
agent of the owner with respect to the custody and disposal
of the articles[Sec399(3)].These provisions also fail to address
the larger question of compulsory wreck removal from the
navigable waters.

Certain acts with respect to wreck like boarding or attempt to

board a vessel which has been wrecked,standard or is in
distress without the permission of the Master, detrimentally
interfering with the saving of any vessel in the distress or
wreck or obliterate any marks thereon or wrongfully carrying
away or remove any part of wreck which has been specifically
prohibited by the status[Sec 400].

Nairobi International Convention On The Removal

ofWreck,2007
The International Community being convinced of the needs
for the uniform system of the International rules and
procedures top ensure prompts and effective removal of
wrecks and payments of compensation for the costs incurred
for the same, under the auspicious of the International
Maritime International Convention on wreck removal at
Nairobi ,Kenya. This provides a detailed frame work for
dealing with wrecks and is expected to fill the vacuum in
International Maritime Law with respect to wrecks and their
removal. The convention is not in force and is uponsignature
from November2007.
The convention define a wreck related hazard as a “danger or
impediments to navigation “or a condition or a threat that
“may reasonably be expected to result in major harmful
consequences to marine environment, or damage to the
coastline or related interest of one or more sates”.

Articles in the convention covers:

.Reporting or locating ships or wrecks-covering the reporting
of casualties to the nearest coastal State;
.Warning to mariners and coastal States about the wreck;
and
.Action by the coastal States to locate the ship or wreck;
.Criteria for determining the hazard posed by a wrecks,
including depth of water above the depth proximity, type of
traffic and vulnerability of port facilities. Environment criteria
such as damage likely to result from the release into the
marine environment of cargo or oil are also included;
.Measures to facilitate the removal of wrecks, including right
and removal hazardous ships and wrecks-which set out when
the ship owner is responsible for removing a wreck and when
a state may intervene;
.Liability of the owners for the costs of locating, marking and
removing ships and wrecks-the registered ship owners are
required to maintain compulsory insurance or other financial
security to cover liability under the convention; and
.Settlement of disputes
The 2007 convention thus makes the ship owners financially
liable and requires them to take out insurance or provide
other financially security to cover the cost of wreck removal.
It provides states with a right of direct action against
insurers.It enables states parties voluntarily to extend the
convention scope to their territorial seas. The convention will
provide a legal basis for the states to remove from their
exclusive economic zones wreck that may posed a hazard to
navigation or to marine or coastal environment