Skip to main content

Foreign Judgment

Foreign Judgment 

According to Section 2(6) 'foreign judgment' means judgment of foreign court and according to Section 2(5) 'foreign court' means a court situated outside India and not established or continued by the authority of the Central Government.

Object: The object behind this provision is to give respect to the judgment of competent foreign court and a legal obligation arises to satisfy the claim. In private international law, certain rules are regarded as common to civilized nations. This recognition is accorded on the rules of justice, equity and good conscience. 

Binding nature of foreign judgment: Section 13 provides that a foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom or any of them claim litigating under the same title [Section 13]. Supreme Court in Lalji Raja and Sons v. Hansraj Nathuram, (1971) 1 SCC 721 held that rule laid down in Section 13 is a substantive law and not merely a rule of procedure. Such judgment is conclusive and operates as res judicata between the parties and privies though not strangers.

In D. Vishwanathan v. Rukun ul Mulk Sayed Abdul, AIR 1963 SC 1 Supreme Court held that while considering whether a judgment of a foreign court is conclusive, the courts in India will not require whether conclusions recorded by foreign court are correct or findings otherwise tenable, i.e., the courts cannot go into merits of the claim and it shall be conclusive as to any matter directly adjudicated upon between such parties subject to exceptions enumerated under Section 13, clause (a) to (f).

Foreign judgments when not binding

Under Section 13, if one of the conditions specified in clauses (a) to (f) is satisfied, a foreign judgment will not be conclusive and it will be open to a collateral attack. These conditions are discussed as under:

Foreign Judgments are not binding 

Foreign Judgments are not binding if-

  • Not passed by a competent court
  • Not on merits
  • Against international law or indian law
  • Against natural justice 
  • Obtained by fraud
  • Founded on breach of Indian law

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Theories of Punishment

Theories of Punishment Punishment in law serves multiple purposes, and the rationale behind these punishments can be understood through different theories of punishment. These theories form the foundation for justifying punishment and help in shaping law s and sentencing policies. Here’s a detailed explanation of each theory with examples: 1. Deterrent Theory The deterrent theory focuses on preventing crime by imposing severe punishments to create fear among people. The idea is that potential offenders will refrain from committing crimes if they fear punishment. Example : The death penalty or long-term imprisonment for serious offenses like murder or terrorism acts as a deterrent for those considering committing such crimes. 2. Retributive Theory This theory is based on the principle of "an eye for an eye" or giving the offender what they deserve. It focuses on vengeance or moral satisfaction, ensuring the punishment is proportionate to the crime committed. The goal is not to...
Post a Comment
Read more

Companies act ,2013

Companies Act, 2013 Meaning and Nature of a Company with Emphasis on its Advantages 1. Meaning of a Company : A company is a legal entity formed by a group of individuals to engage in and operate a business commercial or industrial enterprise. It is governed by the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 in India. According to Section 2(20) of the Companies Act, 2013, "Company means a company incorporated under this Act or under any previous company law." Lord Justice Lindley : "A company is an association of many persons who contribute money or money's worth to a common stock and employ it for a common purpose. The common stock so contributed is denoted in money and is the capital of the company." A company is an artificial person created by law. It has a separate legal identity distinct from its members. It can enter into contracts, own property, sue, and be sued in its own name. 2. Nature of a Company : The nature of a company can be understood through its key ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another, 43 I.A. 151 (P.C. 1915). Section 53 - Fradulent transfer

Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another, 43 I.A. 151 (P.C. 1915).  This citation indicates that the case was decided by the Privy Council (P.C.) in 1915, and reported in volume 43 of the Indian Appeals (I.A.), starting from page 151.  The case of Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another was a dispute over the validity of two conveyances of land executed by a debtor, Kishun Benode, to his relatives, Kamta Prashad and Hakim Lal, on 2nd September 1901. The plaintiff, Musahar Sahu, was a creditor of Kishun Benode who had obtained a judgment against him on 5th December 1901. The plaintiff sought to set aside the conveyances on the ground that they were made with intent to defeat or delay his claim, under section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The courts gave different verdicts on the two conveyances. The first conveyance, in favour of Kamta Prashad, was set aside by the Subordinate Judge and the High Court, as it was found to be without consi...
Post a Comment
Read more