The law with respect to execution of foreign decrees in India is contained in section 44-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said section provides for execution of decrees passed by courts in a reciprocating territory. As per the explanation to the said section, a reciprocating territory means any country or territory outside India which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a reciprocating territory. Some of the countries which have been declared to be reciprocating territories are Honk Kong, Singapore, United Kingdom, Trinidad & Tobago, New Zealand and Bangladesh.

As per the said section, where a certified copy of a decree of any of the superior Court of any reciprocating territory has been filed in a District Court (In India), the said decree may be executed in India as if it has been passed by the District Court. itself. "Superior Courts" with reference to foreign countries means such courts as are specified in the notification. Clause (2) of Section 44-A mandates that a certificate issued by the superior court of the reciprocating territory is to be filed stating the extent to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted.

The District Court before which the decree is sought to be executed is empowered to refuse execution of any such decree if any of the following are established:

a) Where the foreign judgment has not been passed by a court of Competent jurisdiction. As per Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Courts (in India) 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 record. However, such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction. The competence of the foreign Court has to be determined in accordance with the principles of International Law and not merely in accordance with the law of the country in which the foreign Court is situated.

b) Where the foreign judgment has not been given on the merits of the case. Thus, a judgment given in a case in which the defendant put in no appearance, no evidence is called or considered, and in which the judgment is given by default by way of summary procedure is not a judgment on the merits of the case.

c) Where the foreign judgment is based on an incorrect view of international law.

d) Where the proceedings are opposed to the principles of natural justice. For example, a judgment obtained without notice of the suit to the defendant or without giving him a reasonable opportunity of presenting his case is contrary to natural justice.

e) Where the judgment is obtained by fraud. The fraud invalidating a foreign judgment may be either fraud on the part of the party in whose favour the judgment is given or fraud on the part of the Court pronouncing the judgment.

f) Where the foreign judgment sustains a claim founded on a breach of any Indian law. Therefore, where a decree for divorce was given in Uganda on a petition by the husband against his wife who was a resident of Goa where the marriage had been performed, and according to the law in Goa, the marriage was indissoluble, it was held that the decree of divorce could not be confirmed by the Court in Goa.