When Foreign Judgment Not Conclusive: An Analysis of Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code

The pronouncement of a foreign judgment and subsequently its enforcement on a foreign land is a crucial aspect of international law that supports the cross-border legal proceedings. Likewise, Civil Procedure Code (CPC) of India, also recognizes and defines the conditions under which the foreign judgment can be enforceable. Section 13 and Section 14 specifically discuss ‘when foreign judgement not conclusive and presumption as to foreign judgement respectively. These sections provide guidance on when a foreign judgment may not be considered conclusive in Indian courts.

Meaning of Foreign Court

Before understanding the meaning of applicability of ‘foreign judgement’ in India, it is important to understand the meaning of ‘foreign court’ and ‘foreign judgement.’

So, the term “Foreign Court” that involves two terms ‘foreign’ meaning ‘a region/country or nation located outside the country in discussion and hence has no governance control; and, ‘court’ meaning ‘a place presided by a judge or judges to deliver the justice.

Likewise, ‘foreign court’ refers to a court or judicial body which is located outside the territory of the country in discussion. And, in reference to this article, the court located outside the Republic of India and has not been established or governed by the Union Government.

Meaning of Foreign Judgement

“Foreign Judgement” simply refers ‘the pronouncement or judgement’ passed by the any such court located outside the Indian territory or simply foreign court.

Understanding Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code

Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, specifically deal with the conditions under which a foreign judgement is not conclusive. The provision is legislated to ensure that certain key principles are adhered to when recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements in India.

Likewise, the Section 13 states that

A foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title except—

• where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction;

• where it has not been given on the merits of the case;

• where it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognise the law of [India] in cases in which such law is applicable;

• where the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained are opposed to natural justice;

• where it has been obtained by fraud;

• where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in [India].

Now, let’s discuss each of the condition separately but in brief:

(a) Where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction

It is an established principle that if a judgement, which is passed by a court with respect to a dispute that lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate, is null and void ab initio. In other words, in order to make it enforceable, the judgement must be passed by a competent court. Such foreign court must be competent by virtue of both the law of the state and by the definition of International Law.

(b) Where it has not been given on the merits of the case

If a foreign judgement though passed by a competent court but it has not been given on the merits of the case, then it is not applicable in India.

(c) Where it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognise the law of [India] in cases in which such law is applicable;

If a judgement passed based on inconsistent, unrecognised or in transgression of Indian or International law or incorrect interpretation of international law or Indian law, it will not be considered conclusive and shall not be enforceable in India.

(d) Where the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained are opposed to natural justice;

While delivering a judgement, if the principle of natural justice ignored or violated, such foreign judgement would not be considered as conclusive in India.

(e) Where it has been obtained by fraud

If a foreign judgement delivered based on some inappropriate means or by fraud, it would not be accepted in India. This condition reflects the importance that Indian court gives to the integrity of legal proceedings and ensures that judgements obtained through deceptive means are not considerable.

(f) Where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in [India].

When a foreign judgement is founded on a breach of any law that is in force in India, is not enforceable in India. It ensures that any foreign judgement that go against established norms of international law are not recognized in India.

Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment

The “recognition” of a foreign judgement refers the condition in which the government or court of one country acknowledges the judgment pronounced by the foreign court and ‘enforcement,’ on the other hand, refers the implementation of such foreign judgment in India without rehearing the substance of the original lawsuit.

In the present world, refusing to enforce the judgement pronounced by the foreign court (having same level of competency), will make it difficult to maintain the law and order at global level. The acknowledge and enforcement of foreign judgements are demand of the present world and there is as such no reason to refuse until and unless any such judgement violates the principle of justice, equity, or against the morality and public policy.

Challenges and Interpretation

While Section 13 provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating the conclusiveness of foreign judgments, some challenges may arise especially in reference to the interpretation and application of such relevant provisions. To counter such challenges, the Indian legal system should carefully analyze the circumstances surrounding the foreign judgment and determine whether any of the specified conditions apply.

Conclusion

While the rules with respect to Private International Law and the enforcement of its principles differ from nation to nation; however, there are certain (common) regulations, which are deemed to be applicable to almost all civilised legal jurisdictions. In reference to the same principle, section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code plays a crucial role. This provision ensures the proper recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in India. It describes some specific conditions under which a foreign judgment may not be conclusive. Likewise, the section upholds the principles of justice, jurisdiction, and international comity.

FAQs

1. What is the purpose of Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code in India?

Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code specifically outlines conditions under which a foreign judgment may not be considered conclusive in Indian courts. The sole objective behind inserting this provision is to ensure the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments those align with principles of justice, jurisdiction, and international comity.

2. What does "opposed to natural justice" mean in Section 13(d) of the CPC?

In reference to section 13(d) of CPC, "opposed to natural justice" implies that if a foreign judgment was passed by violating the fundamental principles of fairness and justice. Or if legal proceedings leading to the judgment did not provide parties a fair hearing opportunity or were conducted unfairly, the judgment may not be considered conclusive.

3. Is there any time limit for challenging the conclusiveness of a foreign judgment under Section 13?

Section 13 of the CPC does not specify any specific time limit for challenging the conclusiveness of a foreign judgment explicitly. However, in such cases, the aggrieved party or parties must need to raise objections promptly during legal proceedings to contest the recognition of the foreign judgment.