TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1928 (5) TMI 1
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o contends that the Singapore judgment being an ex-parte foreign judgment, the plaintiff's suit based on that judgment must fail. I heard arguments on the legal points involved and they proceeded on the following admitted facts and assumptions: (a) It is admitted that the defendant was residing and carrying on business in Singapore at the time he is alleged to have executed the promissory-note; (b) It is assumed that he did execute the note; (c) It is assumed that the summons in the Singapore suit was tendered to and refused by the defendant and that the Singapore Court was right according to the rules of that Court in holding that the defendant was duly served; (d) It is admitted that at the time of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s-where a foreign judgment is set up as defence, but also to cases in which the plaintiff seeks to obtain a decree in a British Indian Court on a foreign judgment. "Foreign Court" and "Foreign judgment" are defined in Section 2, Civil P.C. and according to those definitions the judgment of the Supreme Court of Singapore is undoubtedly a foreign judgment. Section 13 of the Code makes a foreign judgment conclusive as to matters adjudicated thereby with six specified exceptions. The last four do not apply to the case before me, and the question for consideration is whether the judgment of the Singapore Court comes within the exceptions contained in Sub-section (a) or (b) Section 13. Section 14 enacts that the Court shall presume on the product....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Colombo Court could be said to be a judgment on the merits. The learned Judges held that an ex-parte decree is not necessarily a decree not passed on the merits. They discussed some of the English cases and distinguished the case of Keymer v. Visvanatham Reddi A.I.R. 1916 P.C. 121 on the ground that there a controversy was raised by the defendant and that his defence was struck out on a technical plea. They seem to think that it is only where a defence is raised and that defence fails not after a judicial decision but on account of some defect in form that the judgment could not be said to be a judgment on the merits. 8. The ruling of Parlett, J., in C. Burn v. D.T. Keymer [1913] 7 L.B.R. 56 contains some arguments in favour of holding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wed in this case as is quite clear from the order itself and, that is that a judgment is entered as a matter of course in favour of the plaintiff on the pleadings without the plaintiff being called upon to prove his case. It seems to ma that a decision on the merits involves the application of the mind of the Court to the further falsity of the plaintiff's case and, therefore, though a judgment passed after a judicial consideration of the matter by taking evidence may be a decision on the merits even though passed ex parte, a decision passed without evidence of any kind cannot be held to be a decision on the merits. 11. This distinguishes the case of Ishri Prasad v. Shri Ram AIR1927All510 where the Court, though it took no evidence, ....