ABDURAHIMAN Vs. K.K.AHAMMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A foreign judgment rendered by a court at Sulthanate of Oman was sought to be executed on the file of the court of the District Judge of Kozhikode. The petitioner/judgment debtor inter alia contended that the foreign judgment has not been given on the merits of the case and is not conclusive under Section 13 (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure. A reading of the English translation of the judgment would show that the suit was decreed on consent. There is therefore no merit in the contention of the petitioner that the foreign judgment has not been given on the merits of the case.

(2.) YET another contention raised is that the foreign judgment was not pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction. There is nothing on evidence to show that the court at Sulthanate of Oman lacks jurisdiction to decide the case. The petitioner has not been successful in establishing that the foreign judgment cannot be enforced on account of Sections 13 and 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The order of the court below repelling the contentions of the petitioner in this regard in the execution petition is well founded.

(3.) I have no option but to set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.2010 in E.P. No. 44/2007 on the file of the court of the District Judge of Kozhikode. The court below shall consider as to whether the foreign judgment has been passed by a court in reciprocating territory. The execution proceedings can surge ahead only if Sulthanate of Oman is a reciprocating territory. The amounts already paid by the petitioner to the respondent under the foreign judgment need not however be refunded.