Answer By law4u team
Yes, foreign judgments can certainly be enforced in India, but the process and maintainability depend heavily on whether the judgment originates from a reciprocating territory or a non-reciprocating territory as declared by the Central Government of India under Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The legal framework governing the enforcement and execution of foreign judgments in India is primarily contained in Section 13 and Section 44A of the CPC. When a decree is passed by a superior court of any reciprocating territory, it can be filed directly for execution in an Indian district court as if it had been passed by the Indian court itself. However, if the judgment comes from a non-reciprocating territory, the decree-holder cannot directly execute it in India. Instead, the decree-holder must file a fresh civil suit in an Indian court based on that foreign judgment, treating the foreign judgment as a cause of action, and obtain a fresh Indian decree before it can be executed. To be successfully enforced or recognized in India, any foreign judgment, regardless of whether it comes from a reciprocating or non-reciprocating territory, must strictly pass the test of Section 13 of the CPC. Section 13 sets out six specific conditions under which a foreign judgment will not be considered conclusive in India, meaning it will be deemed unenforceable if it falls into any of these exceptions. 1. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if it has not been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction. The foreign court must have had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties according to both the rules of private international law and the laws of that foreign country. If the court lacked competence, the judgment is a nullity in India. 2. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if it has not been given on the merits of the case. This means the court must have considered and adjudicated upon the evidence and arguments presented by both sides rather than passing a judgment by default or summarily without examining the substantive legal issues. 3. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognize the law of India in cases in which such law is applicable. Indian courts will refuse enforcement if the foreign court manifestly ignored applicable Indian law where private international law dictated its use. 4. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained are opposed to natural justice. This is a crucial ground frequently litigated in India. If the defendant was not given adequate notice of the suit, was denied a fair opportunity to present their case, or if the foreign judge was biased, the judgment violates natural justice and will not be enforced. 5. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud vitiates everything, and if the Indian court is satisfied that the foreign judgment was procured through fraudulent concealment, misrepresentation, or fabrication by the successful party, enforcement will be denied. 6. A foreign judgment is not conclusive if it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in India. If the enforcement of the foreign judgment would violate the public policy of India, or contravene fundamental Indian laws, morality, or public interest, Indian courts will decline to recognize or enforce it. For judgments originating from reciprocating territories, the procedure is governed by Section 44A of the CPC. The decree-holder must file a certified copy of the foreign decree along with a certificate from the foreign court stating the extent, if any, to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted, in a competent Indian district court. Along with this execution petition, the decree-holder must also establish that the judgment satisfies all the threshold requirements of Section 13 of the CPC. Once the execution petition is filed, the judgment debtor is given an opportunity to object to the execution based on the exceptions listed in Section 13. If the objections are overruled, the Indian court executes the foreign decree through attachment of property, arrest, or other execution methods available under Order 21 of the CPC. For judgments originating from non-reciprocating territories, the process is considerably more protracted. The decree-holder cannot file an execution petition under Section 44A. Instead, they must institute a fresh summary or regular civil suit in an Indian court of competent jurisdiction based on the foreign judgment. In this suit, the foreign judgment is treated as a cause of action. The limitation period for filing such a suit in India is three years from the date of the foreign judgment, as governed by the Limitation Act, 1963. During this suit, the defendant gets the opportunity to contest the claim on merits only within the narrow confines of Section 13 of the CPC, because an Indian court will not re-try the original case on its merits. Once the plaintiff successfully proves the validity of the foreign judgment and wins the suit, the Indian court passes a domestic decree, which can then be executed like any other Indian court decree. Apart from the CPC, enforcement of foreign awards in international commercial arbitration is governed separately under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which deals with New York Convention awards and Geneva Convention awards. Such arbitral awards are recognized and enforced directly as decrees of the court upon satisfying certain specified conditions. However, for ordinary civil and commercial judgments, the interplay between Section 13 and Section 44A of the CPC remains the core governing law in India. It is also important to note that public policy objections raised by Indian defendants are scrutinized carefully by Indian courts to ensure that foreign entities cannot bypass Indian legal protections or fundamental public policy norms while seeking to enforce obligations accrued abroad.
