Section 14 CPC: Presumption as to Foreign Judgments

Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) establishes a rebuttable presumption that a foreign judgment, when presented through a document purporting to be its certified copy, was delivered by a court of competent jurisdiction. It does not make every foreign judgment automatically conclusive or executable in India.

Text of Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Official legislative source: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (India Code, PDF).

Meaning and scope of Section 14 CPC

Section 14 is an evidentiary rule about the jurisdiction of the foreign court. It assists the party relying on a foreign judgment by allowing the Indian court to presume jurisdiction initially, rather than requiring that party to prove jurisdiction in every case. The presumption is not absolute.

Important legal expressions

• Foreign court: Under Section 2(5) CPC, a court situated outside India and not established or continued by the authority of the Central Government.
• Foreign judgment: Under Section 2(6) CPC, the judgment of a foreign court.
• Certified copy: A copy presented as formally certified by the appropriate authority; its production triggers the statutory presumption, subject to applicable rules governing proof and admissibility.
• Court of competent jurisdiction: A foreign court whose authority to adjudicate the dispute is recognised under applicable principles of jurisdiction, including Indian private international law.
• Rebuttable presumption: An inference the court is directed to draw unless displaced by contrary material or proof.

How the presumption operates

1. A party produces a document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment.
2. Unless the record itself indicates otherwise, the Indian court presumes that the foreign judgment was pronounced by a competent court.
3. The opposing party may challenge the foreign court's jurisdiction with relevant evidence.
4. If want of jurisdiction is established, the Section 14 presumption is displaced; the judgment may also fail the conclusiveness test under Section 13(a).

The provision does not dispense with proof of other matters when they are disputed, nor does it prevent objections under the remaining clauses of Section 13.

Relationship between Sections 13 and 14 CPC

Section 13 CPC governs when a foreign judgment is conclusive regarding a matter directly adjudicated between the relevant parties. It specifies six exceptions:

1. The foreign court lacked competent jurisdiction.
2. The judgment was not given on the merits.
3. The judgment rests on an incorrect view of international law or refuses to recognise Indian law where applicable.
4. The proceedings were opposed to natural justice.
5. The judgment was obtained by fraud.
6. The judgment sustains a claim founded on a breach of Indian law.

Key distinction: Section 14 creates a presumption only about competent jurisdiction; Section 13 addresses the wider question of whether the foreign judgment is conclusive in India. A judgment may satisfy Section 14 yet fail another Section 13 requirement.

Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in India

Section 14 is not itself an execution provision. Section 44A CPC permits execution in an Indian District Court of qualifying decrees of specified superior courts in territories notified as reciprocating territories, subject to the statutory conditions and Section 13 objections. For judgments from non-reciprocating territories, a fresh suit based on the foreign judgment may be required, subject to limitation and other applicable law.

Section 44A also requires a certificate stating the extent to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted. Its definition of decree excludes specified categories, including taxes, fines and penalties, and arbitration awards even where enforceable as decrees.

Judicial interpretation

Alcon Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Celem S.A. of France (2017) 2 SCC 253

The Supreme Court explained that Section 14 presumes the foreign court's competent jurisdiction, but that presumption can be rebutted. The Court considered the relationship between Sections 13 and 14 in assessing the enforceability of a foreign court order.

Messer Griesheim GmbH v. Goyal Gases Private Ltd. (Supreme Court, 21 April 2026)

The Supreme Court reiterated that recognition of foreign judgments depends on satisfying the substantive safeguards in Section 13. Competent jurisdiction alone does not overcome objections concerning merits, natural justice, applicable Indian law or other statutory exceptions. Read the Supreme Court judgment (official PDF).

Illustrative example

Suppose a creditor presents a certified copy of a foreign money judgment in an Indian proceeding. Section 14 initially supports the inference that the foreign court had jurisdiction. If the debtor establishes that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction recognised under applicable law, that inference falls away. Even if jurisdiction is established, the Indian court must consider any properly raised Section 13 objection and the applicable enforcement procedure.

Frequently asked questions

Does Section 14 make a foreign judgment automatically valid in India?

No. It provides a rebuttable presumption of competent jurisdiction only. Section 13 governs conclusiveness, while execution depends on the applicable procedural provisions.

Who can challenge the presumption under Section 14?

A party disputing the foreign court's jurisdiction may submit evidence showing want of jurisdiction. The court also considers contrary indications apparent on the record.

Is a certified copy sufficient to execute a foreign decree?

Not necessarily. Execution under Section 44A requires satisfaction of its statutory conditions, including the prescribed certificate concerning satisfaction or adjustment, and remains subject to Section 13.

Official legal references

• India Code: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sections 2, 13, 14 and 44A
• Supreme Court of India: Messer Griesheim judgment, 21 April 2026

Note: This article provides general legal information. Whether a particular foreign judgment is conclusive or enforceable depends on the judgment, the foreign court's jurisdiction, applicable notifications, procedural compliance and the facts of the case.