P. Somarajan, J.

This revision by the petitioner is against the order dated 16.11.2016 in E.P.No.35 of 2014 passed by the District Court, Kasaragod. A foreign judgment alleged to have been passed by a three Judge Bench of Sharjah Federal Court of first instance in favour of the petitioner granting recovery of money against the respondent put in execution. The District Judge, on consideration of Ext.B1 passport and after hearing both the parties, found that the counter petitioner/judgment debtor was not in Sharjah at the time when the proceedings were initiated as well as at the time when the judgment was pronounced and that no opportunity was given to the counter petitioner to submit his case and no notice was also served on him regarding the proceedings initiated. Consequently, the execution petition was dismissed by virtue of the impugned order dated 16.11.2016.

2. Heard Sri. Saji Mathew, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. D. Krishna Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. The enforceability of a foreign judgment/decree within the territory of India and the Court established within its territory are governed by Sections 13, 14 and 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 13 deals with the requirements on which a foreign judgment could be treated as 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 litigation under the same title, except the grounds enumerated in clauses (a) to (f) to Section 13 CPC. The grounds enumerated in clauses (a) to (f) are exceptions to general rule engrafted and embodied under Section 13 CPC. Section 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the presumption as to foreign judgments and the Court 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 the record, but such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction. By its nature, the power given under Section 14 and its content would make the legal position clear that the presumption available under Section 14 is a rebuttable one.

4. Section 44A deals with the forum in which a foreign judgment can be executed. Section 44A is extracted below for reference:-

"S.44A. Execution of decrees passed by Courts in reciprocating territory.-

(1) Where a certified copy of decree of any of the superior Courts of any reciprocating territory has been filed in a District Court, the decree may be executed in India as if it had been passed by the District Court.

(2) Together with the certified copy of the decree shall be filed a certificate from such superior Court stating the extent, if any, to which the decree has been satisfied or adjusted and such certificate shall, for the purposes of proceedings under this section, be conclusive proof of the extent of such satisfaction or adjustment.

(3) The provisions of Section 47 shall as from the filing of the certified copy of the decree apply to the proceedings of a District Court executing a decree under this section, and the District Court shall refuse execution of any such decree, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Court that decree falls within any of the exceptions specified in clauses (a) to (f) of Section 13.

Explanation 1.- '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 for the purposes of this section; and 'Superior Courts', with reference to any such territory, means such Courts as may be specified in the said notification.

Explanation 2.- 'Decree', with reference to a superior Court, means any decree or judgment of such Court under which a sum of money is payable, not being a sum payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a like