Section 14 CPC: Presumption as to foreign judgments

Section 14 of Code of Civil Procedure: Presumption as to foreign judgments

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

The Court shall presume , upon the production of any document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment, that such judgment was pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction, unless the contrary appears on the record;

but such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Judgment Sec 2(9)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 14

Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 creates a mandatory statutory presumption of competence in favor of foreign judgments, directing Indian courts to presume that any foreign judgment produced by way of a certified copy was pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Statutory Powers & Jurisdiction: Under the statutory scheme of Section 14, the expression "shall presume" mandates that the court must regard the foreign court's jurisdiction as proved unless and until the contrary is demonstrated by evidence or appears on the face of the record.
Operational Statutory Powers & Jurisdiction: The rule relieves the decree-holder or plaintiff founding an action on a foreign judgment from initially proving that the foreign tribunal possessed competent territorial and subject-matter jurisdiction under private international law.

The second limb of Section 14 establishes that this statutory presumption is rebuttable ("may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction"). The judgment-debtor bears the evidentiary burden to prove that the foreign tribunal lacked competence—such as demonstrating absence of residence, submission, or nationality of the defendant in the foreign forum, or by establishing any of the disqualifying vitiating elements cataloged in Section 13(a) through 13(f) CPC.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Badat and Co. v. East India Trading Co., AIR 1964 SC 538: The Supreme Court held that Section 14 raises a rebuttable presumption of competence upon tender of a properly authenticated certified copy; however, where the foreign court acted without inherent jurisdiction over the person or subject-matter under international law principles, the presumption is wholly displaced.
International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd., (2001) 5 SCC 265: The Supreme Court affirmed that while Section 14 presumes jurisdictional competence, it does not exempt the foreign judgment from scrutiny under Section 13(b) regarding whether the decision was given on the merits of the dispute.

Legal Commentary:

To trigger the benefit of Section 14, practitioners must tender a certified copy conforming to statutory authentication formalities under Section 86 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (formerly Section 86 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872), including diplomatic attestation or Hague Apostille certification. Once admitted, the burden shifts entirely to the adversary to substantiate lack of international competency.

Section 14: Presumption as to foreign judgments

Section 14 of Code of Civil Procedure: Presumption as to foreign judgments

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 14