Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in India: Routes, Risks and Practical Strategy

A foreign judgment is only as valuable as your ability to collect on it. For a business that has won a case in London, Singapore, New York or Dubai against a counterparty with assets in India, the question that matters is not “did we win?” but “can we turn this into money in India, and how long will that take?”

India has a statutory scheme for this, but it is narrower and more technical than many foreign lawyers expect. The route depends on where the judgment came from, what it orders and whether it survives the objections in Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). This guide explains each of those questions, compares enforcement of court judgments with enforcement of arbitral awards, and sets out practical steps for both judgment creditors and debtors.

Key takeaways

• There are two routes for court judgments. A decree of a superior court in a “reciprocating territory” can be executed directly in an Indian district court under Section 44A CPC. A judgment from any other country requires a fresh suit in India with the foreign judgment as the cause of action.
• The list of reciprocating territories is short. Published guides updated in 2026 list the United Kingdom, Singapore, Bangladesh, the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Trinidad and Tobago, New Zealand, the Cook Islands (including Niue), Samoa, Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Aden. The United States, Canada, Australia, China and the EU member states are not on it.
• Section 44A covers only money decrees. Injunctions, specific performance and declaratory orders cannot be executed that way, and taxes, fines, penalties and arbitral awards are excluded.
• Section 13 applies to every foreign judgment, on either route. A judgment that is not “conclusive” under Section 13 will not be enforced, even from a reciprocating territory.
• Arbitral awards often travel better than court judgments. Foreign awards from countries notified under the New York Convention are enforced under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with narrow grounds of refusal.
• Plan enforcement when you draft the contract. Forum, service, jurisdiction wording and asset mapping decide a large part of the outcome long before judgment.

The enforcement map at a glance

Source of the decision	Legal route in India	Main hurdles	Typical speed
Superior court of a reciprocating territory (for example UK, Singapore, Hong Kong, UAE)	Execution petition under Section 44A CPC, treated as a decree of an Indian district court	Must be a money decree; Section 13 objections; correct court and certified documents	Generally faster than a fresh suit
Court of a non-reciprocating country (for example US, Canada, Australia, EU states, China)	Fresh civil suit in India on the foreign judgment	Section 13 tests; full trial process; limitation; the foreign judgment is evidence, not an automatic decree	Slower; depends on how far the defendant contests
Foreign arbitral award (New York Convention territory notified by India)	Enforcement under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996	Narrow grounds under Section 48; formal document requirements	Often faster than a suit, but execution can still take time

Route one: reciprocating territories and Section 44A

What qualifies

Section 44A allows a certified copy of a decree of a superior court of a reciprocating territory to be filed in an Indian district court and executed as if that court had passed it. Both conditions matter:

1. The country must be notified. The Central Government designates reciprocating territories by Official Gazette notification. A treaty or diplomatic assurance is not a substitute for the notification.
2. The court must be a notified superior court. The notification identifies which courts of each territory qualify. A decree of a lower court in an otherwise reciprocating country does not qualify for direct execution. If your judgment comes from a free-zone or specialist court (for example in the UAE), check that the specific court is covered by the notification before relying on Section 44A.

Published guides updated in April 2026 list the current notified territories as the UK, Singapore, Bangladesh, the UAE, Malaysia, Trinidad and Tobago, New Zealand, the Cook Islands (including Niue), Western Samoa, Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Aden. The UAE was added in January 2020. The list can change by fresh notification, so verify it in the Gazette at the time you file.

What it covers and what it does not

Section 44A applies to decrees for the payment of a sum of money. It excludes amounts payable as taxes, other charges of a like nature, fines or penalties, and it does not apply to arbitral awards, even where an award is enforceable as a decree in the country where it was made. Non-money relief such as injunctions, declarations and orders for specific performance falls outside it.

The documents you need

The usual filing includes:

• A certified copy of the decree from the foreign court, with the judgment or reasons if available
• A certificate from the foreign court stating the extent, if any, to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted
• Proof that the court is a superior court of a notified territory
• Proof of service and of the defendant’s appearance or participation, to answer Section 13 objections
• Translations, where documents are not in English or Hindi
• Authentication of foreign documents. Where the country is a party to the Apostille Convention, an apostille is generally the efficient route. Check what the specific Indian court requires.

Section 14 CPC allows the Indian court to presume that a foreign judgment was pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction when a certified copy is produced. The presumption can be rebutted, so do not assume it ends the argument.

Section 44A is not a free pass

Section 44A(3) allows the executing court to refuse execution if the decree falls within the exceptions in Section 13. In practice, a debtor served with notice of the execution petition can raise those exceptions. Treat the route as faster, not as automatic.

Route two: a suit on the foreign judgment

If the judgment is from a non-reciprocating country, it cannot be executed directly. The creditor must file a fresh suit in a competent Indian court, relying on the foreign judgment as the cause of action. The foreign judgment is treated as evidence of the debt and, subject to Section 13, as conclusive on the matters it decided.

Points to plan for:

• Limitation. A suit on a foreign judgment must be brought within three years under the Limitation Act, 1963, counted from the date of the judgment. If an appeal is pending abroad, take advice early rather than assuming time stops running. Execution of a decree from a reciprocating territory is generally treated under the longer limitation period for executing decrees, but confirm this for your facts.
• Court and pecuniary jurisdiction. The suit must be filed where the defendant resides or carries on business, or where property is located, or in a court with original civil jurisdiction. Where it is a commercial dispute, the Commercial Courts Act may apply, with its procedural timelines.
• A real trial risk. Although Section 13 makes a foreign judgment conclusive on the merits it decided, the Indian court will still examine the six grounds in Section 13 and the defendant can raise them in defence.
• Interim protection. Where there is a risk that the defendant will dispose of assets, consider applying in the Indian suit for attachment before judgment or other interim relief. Indian courts grant such relief on specific showings, not as routine.

A practical consequence is that a judgment from a non-reciprocating country, such as the United States, carries real value in India, but the enforcement process is closer to starting a new case than to executing an existing one.

Section 13 CPC: the six objections in practice

A foreign judgment is conclusive as to any matter directly adjudicated between the same parties, except in the six situations below.

Ground	What it means	Where creditors tend to run into trouble
(a) Not pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction	The foreign court must have had jurisdiction in the sense recognised by Indian private international law, not just under its own law	Defendants who never lived or traded in the foreign country and never submitted to its courts. Indian courts have looked at residence, presence and submission, including submission through a jurisdiction clause. Appearing only to contest jurisdiction is generally not treated as submission.
(b) Not given on the merits of the case	The foreign court must have actually considered the merits	Default judgments, strike-out and summary judgments where the defence was not examined, and decisions on purely technical grounds. Indian courts have examined the foreign court’s reasoning closely.
(c) Incorrect view of international law, or refusal to recognise Indian law where applicable	Rare, but available	Foreign courts that applied the wrong governing law where Indian law should have applied
(d) Proceedings opposed to natural justice	The defendant must have had notice and a fair chance to be heard	Defective service, short notice, refusal to hear evidence
(e) Obtained by fraud	Fraud on the court or on the defendant, including fraud as to jurisdiction	Allegations of concealment or perjury in the foreign proceedings
(f) Sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in India	The judgment cannot enforce something Indian law forbids	Claims based on contracts that are illegal or unenforceable under Indian law

Cases such as Moloji Nar Singh Rao v. Shankar Saran (1962) and International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (UK) Ltd (2001) are frequently cited on the “merits” requirement, and R. Viswanathan v. Rukn-ul-Mulk Syed Abdul Wajid (1963) on jurisdiction. Counsel should confirm the current authorities before relying on them for a specific argument.

Public policy and damages. Judgments awarding punitive, multiple or very large non-compensatory damages raise a recurring question under ground (f) and public-policy arguments. The position is not uniform, so assume that such components may be contested and consider separating compensatory and non-compensatory elements where the foreign court permits it.

Practical issues that decide real cases

Currency and interest. Indian courts execute in rupees. Be ready to address the conversion of foreign currency, the interest component awarded abroad and post-judgment interest under Indian law.

Costs orders. A costs award attached to a money judgment is generally treated with it. Standalone interim cost orders raise additional questions, so confirm with counsel before assuming they follow the same route.

Pending appeals and stays. If the foreign judgment is under appeal or stayed, the Indian court may adjourn or refuse to proceed. Obtain current status certificates from the foreign court.

Part-satisfaction and set-off. The certificate of satisfaction is mandatory for Section 44A execution. Inaccuracies can derail the petition.

Non-money judgments. An injunction or an order for specific performance cannot be executed under Section 44A. In a suit on the judgment, Indian courts may still be reluctant to enforce non-monetary relief, and creditors often need to frame a fresh claim.

Asset location. Enforcement is only useful if there are assets within reach. Identify bank accounts, receivables, immovable property, shareholdings and group-company assets early, because a decree against a shell is not a recovery.

Once you hold an Indian decree: execution tools

After the foreign judgment is recognised, execution follows the CPC’s ordinary execution regime. Typical tools include:

• Attachment and sale of movable and immovable property
• Garnishee orders directed at banks and debtors of the judgment debtor
• Appointment of a receiver over assets or a business
• Examination of the judgment debtor on oath about assets (Order 21)
• Civil detention, in limited circumstances, under Section 51 CPC

Execution delays are a recognised problem. The Supreme Court has repeatedly directed courts to dispose of execution petitions quickly, including in Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi (2021), which set directions for faster execution. Even so, execution against a determined debtor can take time, so plan on a campaign, not a single filing.

Foreign arbitral awards: a different and often faster route

For many cross-border contracts, an arbitral award is easier to enforce in India than a court judgment from a non-reciprocating country.

• Legal basis. Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 gives effect to the New York Convention (and, for a smaller set of countries, the Geneva Convention). The award must come from a country that India has notified as a reciprocating Convention territory, and the dispute must be commercial under Indian law.
• Procedure. The party seeking enforcement files the original or certified award and arbitration agreement (with translations if needed). Once the court is satisfied that the award is enforceable, it is deemed a decree of that court and executed under the CPC.
• Narrow defences. Section 48 lists the grounds on which enforcement may be refused, such as incapacity, invalid agreement, lack of notice, awards beyond scope, tribunal composition not in accordance with the agreement, an award not yet binding or set aside at the seat, or conflict with the public policy of India. Public policy for foreign awards is read narrowly: the 2015 amendment confines it to fraud or corruption, contravention of the fundamental policy of Indian law, and conflict with the most basic notions of morality or justice. The Supreme Court has taken a pro-enforcement approach, including in Vijay Karia v. Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi SRL (2020).
• No merits review. Indian courts do not re-examine the merits of a foreign award.

Factor	Foreign court judgment	Foreign arbitral award
Direct execution	Only from reciprocating territories (money decrees)	Yes, from notified New York Convention countries
Review of merits	Limited by Section 13, but the Indian court can test jurisdiction, merits and natural justice	No merits review; narrow Section 48 grounds
Coverage of countries	Short list	Broad list of Convention countries
Non-money relief	Generally not directly enforceable	Depends on the award and Indian procedure; can be more flexible
Confidentiality	Public record	Typically private

Check the Gazette notifications before assuming a particular country is covered under the Convention, as India’s notification practice is specific.

Drafting and forum selection when your counterparty or assets are in India

If you are negotiating a contract with an Indian party or an Indian-asset-holding group, treat enforceability as a design requirement.

1. Prefer arbitration if the counterparty has assets mainly in India and the courts of the chosen forum are not in a reciprocating territory. An institutional award from a Convention country is usually more portable than a court judgment.
2. If you choose a court, choose a reciprocating territory’s superior court (for example the courts of England and Wales, Singapore or Hong Kong), and check that the specific court is covered by the notification.
3. Include an express submission to jurisdiction and an agent for service of process, which supports the “competent jurisdiction” and “natural justice” limbs of Section 13.
4. Pick governing law carefully. A foreign governing law is generally accepted for ordinary commercial contracts, but terms that offend Indian mandatory law invite an objection under Section 13(f).
5. Map assets and keep group structures clear. Identify which entity holds Indian assets and whether guarantees or parent-company commitments exist.
6. Consider security. Where possible, take security over Indian assets, or require performance guarantees, so that you are not entirely dependent on an enforcement process.
7. Compliance with Indian foreign-exchange rules. Remittance of recoveries and certain payment structures may involve FEMA requirements, so involve banking and tax advisers.

If you are the judgment debtor in India

If an Indian company or individual faces enforcement of a foreign judgment, the Section 13 grounds are the starting point, but they need to be applied with care.

• Check how the foreign case was run. Was the defendant served properly? Did it appear? Was the judgment by default or summary? Was the dispute decided on the merits?
• Preserve the evidence. Service records, pleadings, orders and correspondence from the foreign proceedings are central to Section 13 arguments.
• Do not ignore notice. A defendant that does not respond may find that the Indian court proceeds and treats the foreign judgment as conclusive.
• Raise objections early and specifically. Courts expect the grounds to be pleaded precisely.
• Consider settlement. Where the foreign judgment is likely to be recognised, a negotiated payment plan often costs less than contesting a strong decree.

Judgments between India and countries with no reciprocity

United States, Canada, Australia and EU states. None is a notified reciprocating territory, so a judgment from these countries requires a fresh suit in India. For contracts involving Indian counterparties, arbitration is often the more reliable choice.

China. China is not a notified reciprocating territory under Section 44A, and we are not aware of a bilateral treaty between India and China on the mutual recognition of civil and commercial judgments. Chinese courts have generally required a treaty or demonstrated reciprocity before recognising foreign judgments, so a judgment is unlikely to travel easily in either direction. For India-China contracts, arbitration with an award enforceable under the New York Convention is normally the safer design. See our related article on protecting IP when entering China.

Multilateral options. India is not currently party to the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019). Absent a treaty, enforcement continues to depend on the CPC’s reciprocity list.

A step-by-step enforcement checklist

Stage	Action
Before you sue abroad	Choose forum with enforcement in mind; check the reciprocating territory list; map the debtor’s Indian assets; confirm that the contract has a clear jurisdiction clause and process agent; preserve proof of service.
During the foreign case	Make sure the defendant is properly served and given the chance to appear; keep the court record; avoid shortcuts that could attract a “not on the merits” or natural justice objection; consider whether to seek reasoned judgments instead of summary orders.
After judgment	Obtain certified copies, certificate of satisfaction or non-satisfaction, proof of superior court status and an apostille where applicable; check appeal status; calendar limitation.
Choose the route	Section 44A petition if the court is notified; suit on the judgment otherwise; Part II enforcement if the award is arbitral.
File and protect	File in the Indian court with jurisdiction over the debtor or assets; consider interim attachment; anticipate Section 13 objections and prepare evidence.
Execute	Use attachment, garnishee orders, receivers and asset examination; track execution timelines and press for early disposal.

Common mistakes

1. Assuming any foreign court judgment is executable in India. It is not, unless the court is a notified superior court of a reciprocating territory.
2. Missing the three-year limitation for a suit on a judgment from a non-reciprocating country.
3. Relying on a default or summary judgment without checking the “merits” objection.
4. Skipping a process agent and jurisdiction clause, weakening the competent-jurisdiction argument.
5. Not mapping Indian assets before spending on foreign litigation.
6. Treating injunctions as enforceable in the same way as money decrees.
7. Overlooking the arbitration alternative when drafting the contract.
8. Ignoring documents: missing certificates of satisfaction, uncertified copies and untranslated records slow cases down.

Frequently asked questions

Can I enforce a US judgment in India? Not directly. The United States is not a reciprocating territory, so you must file a suit on the judgment in an Indian court, which must find the judgment conclusive under Section 13.

Which countries are reciprocating territories? Published guides updated in 2026 list the UK, Singapore, Bangladesh, the UAE, Malaysia, Trinidad and Tobago, New Zealand, the Cook Islands (including Niue), Western Samoa, Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Aden. Always confirm against the Official Gazette.

Does an Indian court re-hear the case? No. Section 13 limits the court to the six objections. However, those objections allow it to examine jurisdiction, whether the judgment was on the merits and whether natural justice was observed.

How long do I have to enforce a foreign judgment? For a suit on a judgment from a non-reciprocating country, three years under the Limitation Act is the baseline. Execution of a decree from a reciprocating territory is generally treated with the longer period for executing decrees. Do not rely on the longer period without advice.

Can I enforce a foreign injunction or specific performance order? Section 44A covers money decrees only. Non-money relief is difficult to enforce directly and usually requires a fresh claim in India.

Is an arbitral award easier to enforce than a court judgment? Often, yes, because Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act gives a defined route with narrow grounds of refusal and no merits review. The award must still come from a country notified by India under the Convention.

Indian law gives foreign judgment creditors a workable path, but it rewards those who prepare. The right route depends on the country and the court, the judgment must survive the Section 13 tests, and the practical value of any order depends on how well you understood the debtor’s Indian assets before you started. For new contracts with Indian counterparties, the most effective step is to design the dispute clause for enforcement from day one, usually by choosing arbitration or a superior court of a reciprocating territory.

Esplora Legal’s India desk advises on cross-border litigation and arbitration, enforcement of foreign judgments and awards, and contract structuring across Mumbai, Delhi NCR and Bengaluru.

Disclaimer: This article is for general information and does not constitute legal advice or create a lawyer-client relationship. Laws, Gazette notifications and judicial interpretation change, and individual circumstances differ. Please obtain advice specific to your situation.

Sources and further reading

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Sections 13, 14, 44A and Order 21; Limitation Act, 1963; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Part II and Section 48); Commercial Courts Act, 2015
• Lexology, “Litigation: Enforcement of foreign judgments in India”: lexology.com (library detail g=681612a7-f920-4ad5-8fbb-c37912bb8644)
• Chambers, “Practical Considerations for Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in India”: chambers.com/legal-trends/practical-considerations-for-enforcement-of-foreign-judgments-in-india
• Aran Law, “Enforcing Foreign Decrees in India: A Legal Guide to Section 44A CPC (2026)” (list of notified territories as of April 2026): aranlaw.in/civil-law/enforcing-foreign-decrees-in-india-a-legal-guide-to-section-44a/
• Global Advisory Experts, “How to Execute a Foreign Decree in India”: globallawexperts.com/how-to-execute-a-foreign-decree-in-india/
• Official Gazette notifications under Section 44A CPC: egazette.nic.in