Disclaimer: This article is general information only. It is not legal advice, it does not create an advocate-client relationship, and it is not an advertisement or solicitation.
Key takeaways
- A sunk vessel does not end the carrier's responsibility. The carrier must still show the care the law requires.
- The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 2025 has replaced the 1925 Act, so older articles that quote the 1925 Act need checking.
- More than one route may be open: a contract and bailment claim, an admiralty claim, an insurance claim, and in some cases a consumer complaint.
- Notice and limitation periods are short. Documents and early written notice matter more than argument.
Contents
When a vessel sinks or cargo is lost in transit, the carrier's first response is often that the loss was a peril of the sea or an unavoidable accident. That may be true in some cases. It is not a complete answer in law. Cargo owners in Kerala, whether they ship spices, timber, building material or household goods, should know what a carrier must still prove and which forums are available.
The carrier as a bailee
When goods are handed over for carriage, the carrier holds them as a bailee. Under Section 151 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a bailee must take as much care of the goods as a person of ordinary prudence would take of his own goods of the same bulk, quality and value. Section 152 says that, unless there is a special contract, a bailee who has taken that care is not responsible for loss or destruction.
The practical effect is that the carrier is the party with the facts: the condition of the vessel, the crew, the weather and the route. Courts have generally expected the carrier to explain the loss, and a bare assertion of an accident is rarely enough. It is also worth noting that the Carriers Act, 1865, which imposes strict liability on common carriers, is limited to carriage by land or inland navigation, so claims for sea carriage rest mainly on bailment, the contract and the sea carriage statute, not on that Act.
The sea carriage statute
Older writing on this subject refers to the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925. That Act has been replaced by the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 2025 (Act 19 of 2025), which reflects the Hague-Visby Rules and recognises electronic bills of lading. The core duty remains familiar: the carrier must exercise due diligence to make the ship seaworthy, properly manned and equipped, and to handle, stow, carry and care for the goods properly. The 2025 Act also deals with limits of liability and the time for giving notice of loss or damage, and these should be read from the Act itself for the facts of each case.
Seaworthiness is judged at the start of the voyage. If a vessel founders soon after leaving port in ordinary conditions, a forum may be slow to accept that nothing was wrong with it.
Perils of the sea and collision
Carriers commonly rely on two defences. The first is that the loss came from perils of the sea. The second is that the vessel was in a collision with another ship, often unidentified. Neither is automatic. A carrier relying on an exception generally has to show that the exception actually caused the loss, and that it had first exercised due diligence over the vessel. Under the earlier 1925 regime, a carrier could also rely on navigational error by the master. Whether and how the 2025 Act treats that exception should be confirmed against the text before it is relied on.
Evidence decides these questions: the log book, the master's declaration, the port clearance, survey and weather records, and any marine casualty report. These should be requested in writing without delay.
Routes open to a cargo owner
| Route | Basis | Points to watch |
|---|---|---|
| Civil claim | Contract, bailment, sea carriage statute | Jurisdiction clause and short time limits |
| Admiralty claim | Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 | High Court with admiralty jurisdiction, which includes the Kerala High Court; arrest of a vessel may be possible |
| Insurance claim | Marine cargo policy | Prompt notice to the insurer; insurer may pursue the carrier afterwards |
| Consumer complaint | Consumer Protection Act, 2019, deficiency in service | Goods carried for a commercial purpose may fall outside the definition of consumer |
The consumer route deserves a caution. A person who hires a carrier for personal goods, such as household belongings, is more likely to qualify as a consumer than a trader moving stock for sale. Forums look at the purpose of the carriage. Where the complaint is maintainable, a consumer commission can be a quicker and less costly forum. Where it is not, the civil, admiralty or insurance routes remain. Contract terms may also send disputes to arbitration, a point we discuss in our note on pre-institution mediation in commercial suits. Exporters should also read our guide on exporting spices from Kerala, since loss in transit often intersects with export paperwork.
Questions people ask
Is a carrier always liable when a vessel sinks?
No. A carrier may rely on recognised exceptions, but it generally has to show due diligence over the vessel and that the exception actually caused the loss.
Which sea carriage law applies now?
The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 2025 has replaced the 1925 Act. Contracts made earlier may raise questions about which regime applies, so the dates and the contract should be checked.
Can a trader file a consumer complaint over lost goods?
It depends on the purpose of the carriage. Goods moved for resale or other commercial purpose may fall outside the definition of consumer, and the forum will examine the facts.
Questions on a specific matter depend on the facts, and advice should be taken before acting.