https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98807 An arbitration agreement survives the winding up of a company, because section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 gives the winding-up court concurrent jurisdiction over claims against the company but does not terminate or supersede pre-existing contractual obligations. A company in liquidation remains a legal entity bound by its arbitration clause, and section 446(1) also contemplates continuation of arbitration with leave of the court. The arbitration clause may therefore still be enforced by seeking a stay of suit under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 if the statutory conditions are satisfied. On that basis, refusal of the stay application was erroneous. en-us Fri, 26 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:11:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98807 An arbitration agreement survives the winding up of a company, because section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 gives the winding-up court concurrent jurisdiction over claims against the company but does not terminate or supersede pre-existing contractual obligations. A company in liquidation remains a legal entity bound by its arbitration clause, and section 446(1) also contemplates continuation of arbitration with leave of the court. The arbitration clause may therefore still be enforced by seeking a stay of suit under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 if the statutory conditions are satisfied. On that basis, refusal of the stay application was erroneous. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 26 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98807