1
Foreign Judgement
[Link]:
The term “foreign judgment” is defined as a judgment issued by a
court outside India.
Section 13 of the Code outlines the criteria for recognising a foreign
judgment, Unless a foreign judgment meets the conclusiveness test
outlined in Section 13, it cannot be enforced.
2. Foreign Court
A “foreign court,” refers to a court located outside India that is not
established or continued by the central government.
A court will not enforce a foreign judgment if it is not from a competent
court. These rules are substantive and procedural in nature.
3. Enforcement of Foreign Judgements :
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.
This process allows the successful party in a lawsuit to seek the enforcement
of the judgment in a different jurisdiction where the defendant’s assets are
located or where the judgment debtor resides.
For example, if a court in Country A awards damages to a plaintiff against a
defendant who resides in Country B, the plaintiff may seek to enforce the
judgment in Country B to recover the awarded damages. The process of
enforcement typically involves filing an application in the local court of the
jurisdiction where enforcement is sought, providing evidence of the foreign
judgment and complying with any procedural requirements specified by the
local laws.
[Link] And Scope of Sec. 13, C.P.C.
A foreign judgment under CPC can operate as res judicata, except in the six
cases specified in Section 13
[Link] of Section.13 And 14
The primary objective of Sections 13 and 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure is
to provide a framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign
judgments in India.
2
6. Sources of Law on Enforcement of Foreign Judgements under CPC
There are three primary sources of law concerning the enforcement of foreign
judgments in India:
[Link] Passed by Parliament (The Code): Section 44A of the Code of Civil
Procedure (CPC) explains that judgments from Superior Courts of
Reciprocating Territories are enforceable in India as if they were judgments of
Indian District Courts. However, judgments from non-reciprocating territories
require a fresh case for enforcement, treating the foreign judgment as only of
evidentiary value.
[Link] Treaties: India has bilateral treaties with certain countries
concerning the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. These
treaties govern the terms under which judgments from these countries are
recognised and enforced in India.
[Link] Precedents: Judicial decisions, such as the case of Moloji Nar Singh
Rao v. Shankar Saran, establish principles regarding the enforcement of
foreign judgments. For example, it was ruled that a foreign judgment not from
a superior court of a reciprocating territory cannot be executed in India
without a new suit where it has only evidentiary value.
77. Section 13: Enforceability of a Foreign Judgement under CPC
Requirements for the enforceability of a foreign judgment under CPC in India
include:
Finality: The foreign judgment must be final and conclusive. It should not be
subject to appeal or further review in the foreign jurisdiction.
Compliance with Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure: Section 13
outlines the conditions under which a foreign judgment will not be recognised
or enforced in India. These conditions include:
1. The judgment is not from a court of competent jurisdiction.
2. The judgment is not on the merits of the case.
3. The judgment is founded on an incorrect view of international law or
refuses to recognise Indian law.
4. The judgment violates the principles of natural justice.
5. The judgment was obtained by fraud.
6. The judgment sustains a claim founded on a breach of Indian law.
3
1. When a Foreign Judgement Has Been Passed by a Court Lacking
Jurisdiction
When a foreign judgment has been passed by a court lacking jurisdiction, it
is considered null and void,
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.
The court must have directly addressed the legal matter for the judgment
to be [Link]’s important to note that the conclusiveness of the
judgment lies in the judgment itself, not in the reasoning behind it (ratio
decidendi).
IN 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.
it was refused because the court in Faridkot lacked jurisdiction over the
matter. 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.
2. When Foreign Judgements are 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.
However, there are exceptions. For example, if a suit is dismissed because the
plaintiff failed to appear in court, such a judgment is not considered to be on
the merits of the case. This is because the case was not fully heard and decided
based on the evidence and arguments presented by both parties.
4
It’s important to note that a judgment passed by a court ex parte, where one
party is absent, does not automatically mean that it is not based on the merits
of the case.
If the absent party had been properly notified of the proceedings but chose
not to participate, the judgment may still be considered to be on the merits.
3. When a Foreign Judgement is Against Indian or International Law
A foreign judgment under CPC that is inconsistent or is based on an
incorrect interpretation of international or Indian law will not be
considered conclusive and enforceable in India.
The mistake must be prima facie apparent in the proceedings for this to
apply.
As seen in the case of Narasimha Rao v. Venkata Lakshmi, 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.
4. When a Foreign Judgement 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 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.
[Link] a Foreign Judgement 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.
5
In the case of Satya v. Teja Singh, for example, the husband 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.
[Link] a Foreign Judgement 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.
In the case of Ruchi Majoo v. Sanjeev Majoo, the Supreme Court emphasised
that in matters concerning child custody, the welfare of the child is
paramount. Therefore, an Indian court must independently review the case
and make a decision that considers the best interests of the child, taking into
account any ruling made by a foreign court.
