<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (2) TMI 1111 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786963</link>
    <description>A foreign decree of a superior court in a reciprocating territory was executable in India under Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure because the United Kingdom was treated as a reciprocating territory and the decree was final under English law. The decree was also not barred by the exceptions in Section 13(c) or Section 13(f): alleged FEMA and RBI violations did not by themselves defeat enforcement where the early redemption amount, interest and damages were held remittable within the applicable framework, and the 7.95% interest rate was found consistent with the contractual and regulatory cap. The execution petition succeeded and the objections were dismissed with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 08:36:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887675" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1111 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786963</link>
      <description>A foreign decree of a superior court in a reciprocating territory was executable in India under Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure because the United Kingdom was treated as a reciprocating territory and the decree was final under English law. The decree was also not barred by the exceptions in Section 13(c) or Section 13(f): alleged FEMA and RBI violations did not by themselves defeat enforcement where the early redemption amount, interest and damages were held remittable within the applicable framework, and the 7.95% interest rate was found consistent with the contractual and regulatory cap. The execution petition succeeded and the objections were dismissed with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786963</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>