Procedural Compliance with Section 44-A of CPC Satisfied; Execution Application to Proceed
In a significant development, the Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice Abhay Ahuja, has ruled in favor of Fimbank P.L.C., allowing the execution of a foreign judgment from the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Court in India. The decision, dated 8th June 2026, addresses the procedural complexities involved in executing foreign judgments under Section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908.
Fimbank P.L.C., a financial institution based in Malta, sought to execute a DIFC Court judgment for Rs.24.75 crore against Mr. Rajeev Suresh Bhatia and another Indian national, both directors of Bhatia Tr. Co. LLC. The judgment included interest and costs, with further interest accruing daily.
The primary contention from the judgment debtors was the absence of a mandatory certificate of non-satisfaction from the DIFC Court, as required under Section 44-A(2) of the CPC. This certificate is crucial as it serves as statutory proof of the extent to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted, thus safeguarding against double recovery.
Counsel for Fimbank P.L.C., Mr. Ranjeev Carvalho, argued that the procedural requirement had been met through the submission of a "Penal Notice" dated 24th October 2023 and a subsequent certificate dated 9th December 2025, both from the DIFC Court. These documents certified the foreign judgment as final and executory, addressing the procedural defect and fulfilling the requirements of Section 44-A(2).
Justice Abhay Ahuja, in his detailed judgment, emphasized the importance of procedural compliance while noting that procedural defects could be subsequently cured without invalidating the execution application. The court concluded that the combined documentation submitted by Fimbank P.L.C. satisfied the statutory requirements, allowing the execution process to proceed.
This ruling reinforces the principle that procedural requirements, while mandatory, should not obstruct the enforcement of valid foreign decrees. The court's decision underscores the broader context of facilitating international financial transactions and enforcing foreign judgments in India, particularly from recognized reciprocating territories like the UAE.
The case is set to continue with the execution application and related interim applications scheduled for further hearing on 6th July 2026.
Bottom line:-
Execution of foreign judgments from reciprocating territories under Section 44-A of the CPC - Compliance with procedural requirements, including filing of a certificate of non-satisfaction, is mandatory but procedural defects can be subsequently cured without invalidating the execution application.
Statutory provision(s): Section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Fimbank P.L.C. v. Mr. Rajeev Suresh Bhatia, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc id # 2920620
