1. By consent granted.
2. The plaintiff through C.M.A. 2652 of 2001 seeks to implead of Messrs Order Shipping Inc. As defendant No,2 in the suit for proper adjudication.
3. The facts, which are not disputed, are that the plaintiff invoked the admiralty jurisdiction of this Court against the defendant Vessel by an action in rem. The documents annexed supports the contention of Mr. Naeem Ahmed, learned counsel for the plaintiff that the proposed defendant is owner of the Vessel and has filed written statement. Therefore, he contends that his presence before the Court is necessary for proper adjudication.
' Mr. Mu iammad Naeem learned counsel for the defendant has vehemently opposed the application by filing counter-affidavit. His contention is that the plaintiff has already invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by bringing the action in rem against the Vessel. He cannot join action in personam in the same proceedings against the owner. He also contended that if the plaintiff wants to implead the proposed defendant in proceeding for action in personam then the plaintiff may withdraw the suit against the ship and may proceed against the owner and, the security furnished on behalf of the defendant be discharged. His further contention was that two actions viz. Action in rem and action in personam cannot be joined together except as provided in section 5. Section 4 of the Admiralty Ordinance provides mode of exercise of admiralty jurisdiction by this Court and an action in personam subject to section 5 which permits the exercise of jurisdiction in personam with regard to collision of similar cases, provided:--
(a) The defendant has his ordinary residence or a place of business within Pakistan.
(b) The cause of action arose within the internal or territorial waters of Pakistan; or
(c) An action arising out of the same incident or series of incidents is proceeding in the Court or has been heard and determined in the Court.
' Subsection (5) further contemplates that subject to the provisions of subsection (2), the High Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain an action in person am to enforce a claim to which this section applies whenever any of the conditions specified in clauses (a) to (c) of subsection (1) are satisfied.
' According to subsection (6) the claim to which this section applies are claims for damage, loss of life or personal injury caused by ships, or arising out of collision between ships or out of the carrying out of or omission to carry out a manoeuvre in the case of one or more of two or more ships, with the regulations made under section 214.
' None of the conditions enumerated in subsection (1) are available, which has also been conceded by the plaintiff's counsel. The action ,in personam could have been brought in respect of damage, loss of life or personal injury against as a result of collision. Therefore, the contention of Mr. Naeem Ahmad that since written statement on behalf of defendant No,1 has been filed by proposed defendant and it has submitted to the jurisdiction of this Court. On this plea they cannot be joined as a party. The application is therefore, dismissed.