Section 14 CPC — Presumption as to Foreign Judgments

Introduction

Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with the presumption as to foreign judgments.

The provision creates a presumption in favour of the competence of the foreign court when a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced before an Indian court.

In simple terms:

When a duly authenticated copy of a foreign judgment is produced, the Indian court presumes that the foreign court was competent to pronounce the judgment, unless the contrary appears from the record or is proved.

This presumption is, however, rebuttable.

Statutory Provision

Section 14 CPC — Presumption as to foreign judgments:

“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.”

Meaning of Section 14

Section 14 does not itself declare that every foreign judgment is valid or conclusive in India.

Instead, it establishes a presumption of jurisdiction.

When a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced:

1. the Indian court presumes that the foreign court was competent;
2. the presumption continues unless the contrary appears from the record; and
3. the presumption can also be rebutted by proving that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction.

Therefore:

Section 14 creates a rebuttable presumption, not an irrebuttable conclusion.

Object of Section 14

The main objectives of Section 14 are:

• to facilitate recognition of foreign judgments;
• to avoid requiring the party relying on a foreign judgment to prove jurisdiction in every case as an initial matter;
• to provide evidentiary convenience;
• to respect the judicial acts of foreign courts;
• to allow the opposing party an opportunity to rebut the presumption.

The provision therefore creates a balance between recognition of foreign judgments and protection against judgments of incompetent foreign courts.

Essential Requirements

1. A foreign judgment must be produced

The provision applies when a document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced.

2. The document must purport to be a certified copy

The document must have the character of a certified copy of the foreign judgment.

3. Presumption of competent jurisdiction arises

The Indian court presumes that the judgment was pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.

4. The presumption is rebuttable

The opposing party may establish that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction.

Nature of the Presumption

The presumption under Section 14 is not conclusive.

It is a rebuttable presumption.

The language of the provision expressly states:

“unless the contrary appears on the record”

and further provides that:

“such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction.”

Therefore, a party challenging the foreign judgment can produce evidence showing that the foreign court did not possess jurisdiction.

Section 14 and Section 13

Sections 13 and 14 are closely connected.

Section 13

Section 13 determines when a foreign judgment is not conclusive.

Section 14

Section 14 creates a presumption that the foreign court had competent jurisdiction.

The relationship can be remembered as:

Section 13 → Conclusiveness

Section 14 → Presumption of jurisdiction

Example

A produces a certified copy of a judgment delivered by a foreign court against B.

Under Section 14, the Indian court initially presumes that the foreign court was competent to pronounce the judgment.

B may rebut the presumption by proving that:

• B had no relevant connection with the foreign jurisdiction;
• the foreign court lacked jurisdiction under the applicable law; or
• the circumstances demonstrate that the foreign court had no jurisdiction over the dispute.

If want of jurisdiction is established, the presumption disappears.

“Unless the Contrary Appears on the Record”

The first qualification to the presumption is where the contrary appears on the record.

This means that the material accompanying or forming part of the foreign judgment may itself demonstrate that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction.

In such circumstances, the Indian court need not blindly accept the presumption.

“May Be Displaced by Proving Want of Jurisdiction”

The second important qualification is that the presumption can be rebutted by proof of want of jurisdiction.

The party challenging the foreign judgment may therefore lead appropriate evidence to establish that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction.

Thus:

Certified copy → Presumption of jurisdiction → Rebuttal possible.

Section 14 and Competent Jurisdiction

The expression “competent jurisdiction” is crucial.

The presumption relates specifically to the competence of the foreign court.

It does not mean that the foreign judgment is automatically:

• correct on the merits;
• free from fraud;
• consistent with natural justice;
• consistent with Indian law; or
• conclusive under every circumstance.

Those matters remain subject to Section 13.

Section 14 Does Not Override Section 13

A common mistake is to assume that once Section 14 creates a presumption of jurisdiction, the foreign judgment must necessarily be recognised.

That is incorrect.

Section 14 deals with presumption of jurisdiction.

Section 13 contains the broader grounds on which a foreign judgment may fail to be conclusive.

For example, even if jurisdiction is presumed under Section 14, the opposing party may still challenge the foreign judgment on grounds such as:

• absence of decision on merits;
• violation of natural justice;
• fraud; or
• other applicable exceptions under Section 13.

Section 14 and Burden of Proof

Section 14 initially assists the party relying upon the foreign judgment.

Once the certified copy is produced, the court presumes competent jurisdiction unless the contrary appears on the record.

The party challenging jurisdiction can then attempt to rebut that presumption by proving want of jurisdiction.

Thus, Section 14 provides an evidentiary advantage to the party relying on the foreign judgment, but it does not prevent the opposing party from challenging jurisdiction.

Section 14 and Foreign Judgments on Merits

Section 14 does not create a presumption that the foreign judgment was decided on merits.

Its statutory presumption concerns competent jurisdiction.

Therefore:

Jurisdiction → Section 14 presumption

Merits → Section 13(b) inquiry

This distinction is important.

Section 14 and Natural Justice

Similarly, Section 14 does not create a presumption that the foreign proceedings complied with natural justice.

Natural justice is one of the exceptions under Section 13(d).

Therefore, even if jurisdiction is presumed, the judgment may still be challenged on the ground that the proceedings were opposed to natural justice.

Section 14 and Fraud

Section 14 does not create a presumption that the judgment was obtained without fraud.

Fraud is specifically dealt with under Section 13(e).

A foreign judgment obtained by fraud may therefore fail to be conclusive even though jurisdiction was initially presumed under Section 14.

Section 14 and Certified Copy

The statutory trigger for the presumption is the production of a document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment.

The certified copy provides the evidentiary basis for the statutory presumption.

The party relying on the judgment therefore needs to produce the appropriate certified document in accordance with the applicable evidentiary and procedural requirements.

Important Case Law

R. Viswanathan v. Rukn-ul-Mulk Syed Abdul Wajid

Citation: AIR 1963 SC 1

The Supreme Court examined the principles governing foreign judgments and foreign jurisdiction under Sections 13 and 14 CPC.

The case is important for understanding the circumstances in which Indian courts recognise judgments of foreign courts.

Satya v. Teja Singh

Citation: (1975) 1 SCC 120

The Supreme Court considered the question of foreign jurisdiction and the circumstances in which a foreign judgment may not be recognised in India.

The decision illustrates the importance of examining the actual jurisdiction of the foreign court rather than treating the foreign judgment as automatically binding.

Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi

Citation: (1991) 3 SCC 451

The Supreme Court considered the recognition of a foreign matrimonial judgment and examined the requirements governing foreign judgments under Section 13.

The case demonstrates that foreign judgments must satisfy the statutory requirements before they can receive recognition in India.

Example — Rebutting the Presumption

Suppose A produces a certified copy of a foreign judgment against B.

Initially:

Section 14 → Foreign court presumed competent.

B then establishes through appropriate evidence that:

• B was not subject to the jurisdiction of that court; and
• the foreign court had no legally recognised basis for exercising jurisdiction.

The presumption under Section 14 can then be displaced.

The foreign judgment may consequently fail under Section 13(a).

Section 14 and Section 13(a)

These provisions work together particularly closely.

Section 14

Creates the initial presumption:

Foreign court was competent.

Section 13(a)

Provides the exception:

A foreign judgment is not conclusive where it was not pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Therefore, the practical sequence is:

Certified copy produced → Jurisdiction presumed → Opposing party may rebut → If want of jurisdiction proved → Section 13(a) may apply.

Common Confusions

Does Section 14 make every foreign judgment conclusive?

No.

It only creates a presumption regarding competent jurisdiction.

Is the presumption conclusive?

No.

It can be rebutted by proving want of jurisdiction.

Does Section 14 presume that the judgment was given on merits?

No.

The provision specifically concerns the competence of the foreign court.

Does Section 14 prevent a challenge based on fraud?

No.

Fraud remains a ground under Section 13(e).

Does Section 14 override Section 13?

No.

The two provisions operate together.

What happens if the record itself shows lack of jurisdiction?

The statutory presumption can be displaced where the contrary appears on the record.

Examination Point

A frequently asked question is:

“What is the presumption under Section 14 CPC regarding a foreign judgment?”

A concise answer is:

Section 14 CPC provides that when a document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced, the court shall presume that the judgment was pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction, unless the contrary appears on the record. The presumption is rebuttable and may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction.

Easy Formula

Remember:

CERTIFIED COPY → PRESUMED COMPETENT → PRESUMPTION REBUTTABLE

Section 13 vs Section 14

Basis	Section 13	Section 14
Subject	Conclusiveness of foreign judgment	Presumption as to foreign judgment
Main focus	When judgment is not conclusive	Presumption of competent jurisdiction
Nature	Substantive recognition rule	Evidentiary presumption
Jurisdiction	Exception under Section 13(a)	Initially presumed
Rebuttable?	Exceptions must be established	Yes
Key document	Foreign judgment	Certified copy of foreign judgment

Important Questions to Prepare

1. What is the object of Section 14 CPC?
2. What presumption is created by Section 14?
3. Is the presumption under Section 14 conclusive?
4. How can the presumption of jurisdiction be rebutted?
5. What is the significance of a certified copy of a foreign judgment?
6. Explain the relationship between Sections 13 and 14 CPC.
7. Does Section 14 presume that a foreign judgment was given on merits?
8. Can fraud still be pleaded despite Section 14?
9. What is meant by “competent jurisdiction” under Section 14?
10. Explain the phrase “unless the contrary appears on the record.”

Key Legal Principles

1. Section 14 creates a presumption

A certified copy of a foreign judgment raises a presumption of competent jurisdiction.

2. The presumption is rebuttable

Want of jurisdiction can be proved.

3. The presumption concerns jurisdiction

It does not automatically establish the merits, fairness or validity of the judgment.

4. Section 13 remains applicable

The foreign judgment must still satisfy the requirements of Section 13.

5. Certified copy is important

The statutory presumption arises upon production of a document purporting to be a certified copy of the foreign judgment.

Key Takeaways

Concept	Principle
Provision	Section 14 CPC
Subject	Presumption as to foreign judgments
Trigger	Production of certified copy
Presumption	Foreign court had competent jurisdiction
Nature	Rebuttable
Rebuttal	Proof of want of jurisdiction
Related provision	Section 13 CPC
Section 13(a)	Foreign judgment not conclusive if court lacked competent jurisdiction
Core principle	Presumption of jurisdiction, not automatic validity

ALSO READ: Section 13 – When Foreign Judgment Is Not Conclusive

Conclusion

Section 14 CPC provides an important evidentiary presumption concerning foreign judgments. When a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced, the Indian court presumes that the judgment was pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.

However, this presumption is not absolute. It can be displaced where the contrary appears on the record or where the opposing party proves that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction.

The central principle is:

Section 14 presumes jurisdiction; it does not automatically establish the conclusiveness of the foreign judgment.

The easiest way to remember Section 14 is:

CERTIFIED FOREIGN JUDGMENT → PRESUMPTION OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION → REBUTTABLE BY PROOF OF WANT OF JURISDICTION.