Latest JudgementCode of Civil Procedure, 1908

Blinston Savio Fernandes v. Leandra Marie Fernandes, 2026

The judgment removes administrative confusion caused by outdated interpretations of “foreign court” under Portuguese law.

Bombay High Court·30 April 2026

Court

Bombay High Court

Date of Decision

30 April 2026

Judges

Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Borkar

Citation

Acts / Provisions

Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 (PCC) Portuguese Code of Civil Procedure, 1939 (PCCP) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)

Facts of the Case

The petitioner sought cancellation of a marriage certificate issued in 2007 after a divorce decree was granted by a Family Court in Karnataka.
The Family Court in Bangalore had dissolved the marriage by a divorce decree dated 04 January 2022.
Based on this decree, the petitioner requested the Registrar of Marriages, Margao (Goa) to cancel the marriage registration.
The Registrar refused, stating that the Karnataka Family Court order was a “foreign court order” under the Portuguese Civil Code and required confirmation under Articles 1101 and 1102 of the PCCP.
The petitioner challenged this refusal before the Bombay High Court.

Whether civil court orders passed in other States of India can be treated as “foreign judgments” under the Portuguese Civil Code and PCCP applicable in Goa?
Whether the Registrar of Marriages in Goa can refuse to act upon a divorce decree passed by an Indian civil court on the ground of lack of jurisdiction?
Whether provisions of the Portuguese Civil Code and PCCP treating “foreign courts” apply to courts within India after extension of CPC, 1908 to Goa?

The Court held that Goa is part of India and governed by the Constitution of India, and all Indian civil court orders are binding in Goa.
It ruled that the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 and PCCP, 1939 cannot treat Indian courts as “foreign courts.”
The definitions of “foreign judgment” and “foreign court” under CPC, 1908 apply even to Portuguese-era laws in Goa.
The Court held that references to “foreign” or “foreign court” in Portuguese laws must be read as inapplicable to courts within India.
It held that after extension of CPC, 1908, Indian civil court decrees do not require confirmation by High Court under PCCP provisions.
The Registrar’s refusal to cancel the marriage certificate was held to be illegal and set aside.
The Court directed that the marriage certificate must be cancelled in compliance with the Karnataka Family Court decree.
The writ petition was disposed of with binding directions to all Registrars in Goa.

Civil court judgments passed anywhere in India are not foreign judgments in Goa.
Registrars in Goa are bound to comply with Indian court orders.
Portuguese Civil Code provisions treating “foreign courts” do not apply to courts within India.
Divorce decrees passed by competent Indian courts are directly enforceable in Goa without additional confirmation.

The Court reaffirmed the constitutional supremacy over colonial-era Portuguese legal remnants in Goa.
It clarified the legal integration of Goa into the Indian judicial system post-liberation.
The judgment removes administrative confusion caused by outdated interpretations of “foreign court” under Portuguese law.
It strengthens the principle of uniform enforceability of Indian civil court judgments across all States and Union Territories.
The ruling ensures legal certainty in matrimonial and registration matters in Goa.
It also prevents unnecessary litigation caused by misinterpretation of hybrid legal systems