 Introduction:

Enforcement of foreign judgments plays an important role in ensuring the effectiveness of

legal systems across borders. As businesses and individuals increasingly engage in
international transactions and activities, the need for a mechanism to enforce judgments
obtained in one jurisdiction in another jurisdiction becomes paramount.

The enforcement of foreign judgments in India is a critical aspect of international law and
global trade relations. As India becomes an increasingly important player in the global
economy, the need for cross-border legal cooperation has grown. Foreign judgments refer to
decisions made by a court in one country that are to be enforced in another jurisdiction.

The term “foreign judgment” is defined in Section 2(6) of the Code of Civil Procedure as a
judgment issued by a foreign court.

A “foreign court,” as defined in Section 2(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, refers to a court
located outside India that is not established or continued by the central government.

Enforcement of foreign judgments is the process of recognising and giving effect to a

judgment or order issued by a court in one country in another country.

1|Page
 Statutory Provisions:

Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 outlines the criteria for recognising a foreign
judgment, which is a prerequisite for any enforcement proceedings. Unless a foreign
judgment meets the conclusiveness test outlined in Section 13, it cannot be enforced. The
purpose of these provisions is to ensure that judgments from foreign courts are respected and
enforced in India in a manner that is consistent with principles of justice, equity and good
conscience.

According to Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a foreign judgement is conclusive

and enforceable except when -

1. It is passed by a Court lacking Jurisdiction -

When a foreign judgment has been passed by a court lacking jurisdiction, it is considered null
and void, following a universally recognised principle of law. This principle applies to Private
International Law as well, as reflected in the Code of Civil Procedure.

For a foreign judgment to be recognised as conclusive and enforceable, it must have been
issued by a court of competent jurisdiction under both the State’s Law and International Law.

2. It is not passed on merits of the case -

For a foreign judgment under CPC to be considered conclusive, it must have been given on
the merits of the case. A judgment is considered to be on the merits when the judge, after
conducting a fair hearing where both parties have had the opportunity to present their case
and the evidence has been scrutinised, rules in favour of one party.

3. When a Foreign Judgement is Against Indian or International Law -

A foreign judgment under CPC that is inconsistent with goes against or is based on an
incorrect interpretation of international or Indian law will not be considered conclusive and
enforceable in India.

4. It is passed in direct contravention of the Principles of Natural Justice -

A foreign judgment under CPC that is passed in direct contravention of the principles of
natural justice will be considered null and void. Natural justice requires that a judgment be

2|Page
obtained after following due process of law, which includes giving both parties a fair hearing
and allowing them to present their case.

If a judgment is passed in ignorance of or in violation of these principles, the trial will be

considered “coram non judice,” meaning it was conducted without jurisdiction. Such a
judgment will not be enforceable.

5. It is procured via fraud -

If a foreign judgment under CPC is obtained through fraudulent means, it will not be
considered res judicata and thus not be considered conclusive or enforceable in India.

6. It is found to be in violation of Indian Law -

When a foreign judgment is based on a violation of Indian law, it will not be enforceable in
India. It is important for any nation-state not to blindly adopt the rules of Private International
Law. Every case adjudicated by Indian courts must adhere to Indian law and must not
contradict Indian public policy. If a foreign judgment is delivered based on grounds that are
inconsistent, unrecognised or in violation of Indian or international law, it will not be
considered conclusive and will not be enforceable in India.

Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the presumption of lawfulness of
foreign judgments. It presumes that a foreign judgment is valid unless proven otherwise.

3|Page
 Case Laws:

 Satya v. Teja Singh -

The husband had misled the Nevada Court about his domicile and had obtained a divorce
decree by falsely claiming to be an American citizen.

The Supreme Court of India held that the decree of divorce obtained through fraud would not
be enforceable and was considered null and void. This principle reflects the stance in Private
International Law that judgments obtained through fraudulent means should not be
recognised or enforced.

 Narasimha Rao v. Venkata Lakshmi -

The petitioner and respondent married at Tirupati according to Hindu Law. They separated
and filed for dissolution in the Circuit Court of St Louis County, Missouri, USA. The decree
was passed ex parte.
The petitioner also filed for dissolution in the Sub Court of Tirupati.
The Supreme Court of India held that the Missouri Court had no jurisdiction under the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955, to pass a decree of dissolution of marriage since the marriage was
solemnized in India, and the parties last resided together in New Orleans, Louisiana—not
Missouri. The decree passed by the Missouri court was based on “irretrievable breakdown of
marriage,” a ground not recognized under the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, the foreign
judgment was unenforceable in India.

 International Woolen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd -

The petitioner placed an order with the defendants for greasy fleece wool, upon delivery the
petitioner claimed that the wool was of inferior quality and refused to pay the price.

4|Page
The petitioner filed a case against the defendants in the Central London County Court, UK.
The case proceeded ex parte and a decree was passed in favour of the defendant. The
defendant then filed for execution of the decree in a Ludhiana Court

The Supreme Court of India held that a foreign decree cannot be enforced in India if it is not
passed on merits or violates principles of natural justice.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the decree passed by the Central London
County Court could not be executed in India as it was not passed on merits. The Court
emphasized that foreign judgments must meet the requirements of Section 13 of the CPC to
be enforceable in India.

 Moloji Nar Singh Rao v. Shankar Saran -

A suit was filed by the plaintiff in a foreign Court for recovery of some amounts against the
defendants. The defendants did not appear despite service of the writ of summons. The suit
thereafter was proceeded exparte against the defendants. The claim was decreed. The decree
was brought to the local court for execution. After a round of litigation on the executability of
the foreign decree the matter came up before the Supreme Court of India. The major issue
which came up before the Court for consideration was "what conditions are necessary for
giving jurisdiction to a foreign court before a foreign judgment is regarded as having extra-
territorial validity." The Supreme Court in order to answer this issue held that none of those
conditions were satisfied in the present case. The Court while applying those conditions
observed that:

a. The respondents (defendants) were not the subjects of Gwalior (foreign country).

b. They did not owe any allegiance to the Ruler of Gwalior and therefore they were
under no obligation to accept the judgments of the Courts of that state.

c. They were not residents in that state when the suit was instituted.

d. They were not temporarily present in that State when the process was served on them.

e. They did not in their character as plaintiffs in the foreign action themselves select the
forum where the judgment was given against them

f. They did not voluntarily appear in that court.

5|Page
 g. They had not contracted to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court.

Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the foreign decree was a nullity and could not be
executed in the local courts. The Court, after having relied on common law precedent, held
that foreign Courts may only be regarded as Courts of competent jurisdiction and exercise
jurisdiction on foreigners, if they reside within their jurisdiction or, have voluntarily
submitted to their jurisdiction.

It also held that a foreign judgment not emanating from a superior court of a reciprocating
territory cannot be executed in India without the filing of a new suit in which the judgment
has only evidentiary value.

 Gurdyal Singh v. Rajah of Faridkot -

In this case, a person filed a suit in the court of Faridkot against a former employee for
misappropriation of money. However, the employee was not a resident or domiciled in
Faridkot at the time of the suit. The court in Faridkot passed an ex parte decree against the
employee. When the plaintiff sought to enforce this decree in a court in British-occupied
Indian territory, it was refused because the court in Faridkot lacked jurisdiction over the
matter. The mere occurrence of the alleged embezzlement in Faridkot did not confer
jurisdiction on the Faridkot court, as the employee was neither residing nor domiciled there at
the time of the decree. Therefore, according to the principles of Private International Law, the
Faridkot court lacked jurisdiction, rendering the decree null and void.

 Ramanathan Chettyar and Another v Kalimuthu Pillay -

The Court elucidated the following circumstances in which the foreign court is said to have
competent jurisdiction:

 where the defendant is a subject of the country in which the judgment was passed;

 where the defendant is a resident of the country in which the action was commenced;

 where the defendant has in a previous case filed a suit in the same forum;

 where the defendant has voluntarily appeared; or

6|Page
  where the defendant has contracted to submit itself to the jurisdiction of the foreign
court.

 Sources of Law on Enforcement of Foreign Judgements -

There are three primary sources of law concerning the enforcement of foreign judgments in
India:

 Laws Passed by Parliament: Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
explains that judgments from Superior Courts of Reciprocating Territories that is
territories located outside India are enforceable in India as if they were judgments of
Indian District Courts if they are filed in the District Court. Some of the reciprocating
territories are United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Bangladesh, Malaysia,
Newzealand. Recognition of a foreign judgment also depends upon the conditions of
reciprocity, which are the foundation of international treaties governing the recognition
and enforcement of foreign judgments in India.
 Bilateral Treaties: India has bilateral treaties with certain countries concerning the
recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments such as Bangladesh, Hong Kong, New
Zealand, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Arab Emirates, and the United
Kingdom. These treaties govern the terms under which judgments from these countries
are recognised and enforced in India.

 Judicial Precedents: Judicial decisions are extremely crucial as they establish principles
regarding the enforcement of foreign judgments.

7|Page
 Conclusion:

The enforcement of foreign judgments under CPC is essential for promoting legal certainty,
facilitating cross-border trade and commerce and ensuring access to justice in a globalised
world. It provides parties with the assurance that their rights and obligations will be respected
and enforced across borders, thus fostering trust and confidence in international transactions.
As such, efforts to improve and streamline the enforcement of foreign judgments can
contribute significantly to the promotion of a fair and efficient international legal framework.

 Bibliography:
1. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908;
2. Live Law;
3. Mondaq;
4. iblog Pleaders;
5. Lawctopus.

8|Page