When foreign judgment not conclusive
Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with when foreign judgment not conclusive. A foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title except-- (a) where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction; The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1909.
A foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title except--
(a) where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction;
(b) where it has not been given on the merits of the case;
(c) where it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognise the law of 1 [India] in cases in which such law is applicable;
(d) where the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained are opposed to natural justice;
(e) where it has been obtained by fraud;
(f) where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in 1 [India].
Section 13, The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-1.pdf 2001-04-25 DATE VERIFIED. CA 3316-17/2001. Variava/Khare. A foreign (English) ex parte money decree that is not on the merits is not conclusive under CPC 13(b) and is not executable under CPC 44A(3). Fills priority CPC 13. Do not remap CPC 11 (already filled) even though constructive res judicata is discussed.
On this section: A foreign ex parte money decree not decided on the merits is not conclusive under s.13(b) (International Woollen Mills).
-
S. Iyyapan vs United India Insurance Co. Ld.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An insurance company cannot deny or avoid its statutory liability to pay compensation to third-party accident victims merely on the ground that the driver, although holding a valid and effective driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle, did not possess a specific endorsement to drive that particular light motor vehicle when used for commercial purposes. The driver's possession of a valid light motor vehicle licence is sufficient authority to operate any type of light motor vehicle regardless of whether it is used for personal or commercial transportation. The statutory obligation of the insurer under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to satisfy judgments and awards in respect of third-party liability cannot be defeated on such technical distinctions between subcategories of light motor vehicles. The compulsory insurance legislation is fundamentally a social welfare measure designed to ensure that accident victims receive compensation, and all relevant provisions must be interpreted to effectuate this paramount protective purpose.
On this section: Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in reciprocating countries
-
Discovery Drilling Pte Limited vs Parmod Kumar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A foreign judgment passed by a court lacking competent jurisdiction over the defendant cannot be enforced in India under Section 44A CPC, even if the foreign court is a 'superior Court' of a 'reciprocating territory'. Specifically, where a defendant is added to proceedings in a foreign court without their written consent and the subject matter of the dispute does not fall within the specialized jurisdiction of that court, the foreign court lacks competent jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute, and the resulting judgment falls within the exception specified in Section 13(a) CPC and is not enforceable in India.
On this section: Specifies exceptions to conclusiveness of foreign judgments including lack of competent jurisdiction, judgment not on merits, violation of natural justice, fraud, and breach of Indian law
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… It has further been pleaded by the plaintiff that judgment/decree passed by Dubai Court is not binding on the parties and it should be declared as null and void since it was not pronounced by court of competent jurisdiction and hit by Section 13(a) and (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. (a) That for adjudication of the present lis in hand, it is relevant to refer Section 13 CPC which is as follows :- 13. When foreign judgment not conclusive :- A Foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the …
Questions about Section 13
What have the courts held on Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd. (25 Apr 2001) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: A foreign ex parte money decree not decided on the merits is not conclusive under s.13(b) (International Woollen Mills). Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2001 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CPC 13, section 13 CPC, section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U.K.) Ltd. (25 Apr 2001).
What should I read with Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure come into force?
Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, cited as CPC 13, came into force on 01 Jan 1909, having been enacted on 21 Mar 1908. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 115. Revision2475 words
- 60. Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree1869 words
- 2. Definitions890 words
- 9. Courts to try all civil suits unless barred714 words
- 42. Powers of Court in executing transferred decree653 words
- 92. Public charities610 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.