Foreign default judgment without evidence is not conclusive on the merits under Section 13(b) CPC.

A foreign decree entered merely on default of appearance, without trial on evidence, is not a judgment on the merits for Section 13(b) of the Civil Procedure Code. The Court held that conclusiveness requires real adjudication of the dispute, and a mechanically entered default judgment does not satisfy that statutory test. As the foreign judgment lacked a merits-based determination, it could not support a suit in India and the claim founded on it was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a foreign judgment obtained against the defendant on default of appearance, without trial on evidence, is conclusive and can support a suit in India under Section 13(b) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Analysis: The judgment examined the effect of a foreign decree passed mechanically under the foreign court's procedure when the defendant, though served, did not appear and no evidence was taken. It distinguished authorities where judgments entered without adjudication on evidence were treated as not being decisions on the merits, and held that the statutory requirement in Section 13(b) is not satisfied by a default decree entered as a matter of course. The Court treated the absence of trial on evidence as fatal to conclusiveness under the Code.

Conclusion: A foreign judgment given merely on default of appearance, without any trial on evidence, is not a judgment on the merits within Section 13(b) of the Civil Procedure Code and cannot form the basis of a suit in India.

Final Conclusion: The question referred was answered against enforceability of the foreign default judgment, leaving the suit unsustainable on that basis.

Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of Section 13(b) of the Civil Procedure Code, a foreign decree is conclusive only if it is given on the merits of the case after real adjudication, and a judgment entered merely because the defendant failed to appear is not on the merits.

---