The Bombay High Court, under the Admiralty jurisdiction, considered an application for summary judgment filed by Cockette Marine Oil DMCC against OSV Beas Dolphin and associated vessels. The case centered on unpaid dues for bunker supplies made to three vessels, with the plaintiff seeking to enforce claims against the vessels and their beneficial owners. The court examined the maintainability of the suit in light of ongoing insolvency proceedings against one of the defendants, highlighting that the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) barred the plaintiff’s claims. The application for summary judgment was rejected, with the court affirming that claims against the insolvent entity could not proceed under the current legal framework.

1. Background of the Case:

   • Details of the bunker supplies made to three vessels and the subsequent unpaid dues.
   • Specifics of the contractual agreements between Cockette Marine Oil DMCC and the defendants.

2. Legal Proceedings:

   • Overview of the plaintiff's application for summary judgment under Order XIII-A, Rule 1, read with Order XII Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code.
   • Discussion of the moratorium imposed by the IBC and its effect on the plaintiff's claims.

3. Court's Analysis:

   • Examination of the maintainability of the suit in the context of the IBC.
   • Reference to previous judgments and legal precedents impacting the decision.

4. Conclusion:

   • The court’s decision to reject the application for summary judgment.
   • Implications for similar maritime claims amidst insolvency proceedings.