Foreign judgment enforceability fails where summary disposal overlooks triable issues and regulatory permission is needed for enforcement.

A foreign judgment is enforceable in India only if it is conclusive under Section 13 CPC, including that it is on the merits and consistent with natural justice. Here, the English court's summary judgment was entered after refusal of leave to defend despite contemporaneous documents indicating triable issues, so the decree did not satisfy the statutory test of conclusiveness and could not be enforced. The RBI/FERA condition did not create an absolute bar to proceedings, but enforcement of the decree required regulatory permission before payment or enforcement steps could proceed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the English Court judgment satisfied the requirements of Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for enforcement in India; (ii) Whether the RBI condition issued under Section 47 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 barred enforcement of the foreign decree.

Issue (i): Whether the English Court judgment satisfied the requirements of Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for enforcement in India.

Analysis: A foreign judgment is enforceable only if it is conclusive within Section 13 CPC, including that it must be on the merits and not opposed to natural justice. The English Court proceeded by summary judgment after refusing leave to defend, despite contemporaneous documents and circumstances disclosing triable issues. The record included balance sheets and board minutes that required fuller proof and could not be ignored at the summary stage. In these circumstances, the foreign judgment was not the product of a fair adjudication on contested issues and failed the statutory test of conclusiveness.

Conclusion: The issue was answered against enforceability of the foreign judgment and in favour of the respondent.

Issue (ii): Whether the RBI condition issued under Section 47 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 barred enforcement of the foreign decree.

Analysis: Section 47 of FERA distinguishes between bringing legal proceedings in India and taking steps to enforce a judgment. The provision permits adjudication of liability, but bars enforcement steps unless the Central Government or RBI permits payment. The RBI condition stating that no liability would extend to the Indian company on invocation of the guarantee did not create an absolute bar to proceedings, but regulatory permission was required before enforcement could proceed. The condition was therefore not a complete answer to jurisdiction to decide liability, though it remained relevant at the enforcement stage.

Conclusion: The issue was decided by holding that the RBI condition did not impose an absolute bar on proceedings, but enforcement required regulatory permission.

Final Conclusion: The foreign judgment could not be enforced in India because it did not satisfy the statutory requirements governing conclusiveness and enforcement of foreign decrees.

Ratio Decidendi: A foreign decree obtained through summary disposal despite triable issues is not conclusive under Section 13 CPC, and enforcement of a money decree affected by FERA-controlled foreign exchange conditions cannot proceed without the requisite regulatory permission.

---