An international contract calls for the identification of the law that would govern the transaction in the event of a dispute on the matter between the parties. Indian private international law adopts the doctrine of “the proper law of contract” to identify the legal system that will regulate an international contract. In the absence of any codification, the interpretation of the doctrine has been left to the courts. The judiciary adopts the common law tripartite hierarchy, viz., the “express choice”, “implied choice” and “the closest and most real connection” test to determine the proper law. However, the existing case law demonstrates the diverse interpretations given to each of these factors in India in the post-colonial era. The paper examines the manner in which the blind adoption of the decisions of the English courts has considerably hindered the development of Indian private international law. In this regard, the author suggests some plausible solutions to render India more amenable to international trade and commerce – such as the adoption of mechanisms similar to those formulated by its continental counterpart.

一项国际合同要求在双方之间就此事发生争端时，确定适用于交易的法律。印度的国际私法采用“适当的合同法”原则来确定规范国际合同的法律制度。在没有任何编纂的情况下，该学说的解释权留给了法院。司法机构采用普通法三方等级制，即“明确选择”，“隐含选择”和“最密切，最真实的联系”测试，以确定适当的法律。但是，现有的判例法证明了后殖民时代印度对这些因素中的每一种都有不同的解释。本文考察了盲目采用英国法院判决的方式在很大程度上阻碍了印度国际私法发展的方式。在这方面，作者提出了一些可行的解决方案，以使印度更适应国际贸易和贸易，例如采用类似于其大陆对手制定的机制。