https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99130 Proceedings under section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 are confined to examining the arbitration agreement and the making of a reference; the court cannot decide disputed issues on liability, such as alleged forgery of an acknowledgment or full payment of the debt, because those matters are for arbitration. The pendency of winding-up proceedings does not make an application under section 20, or an appeal from it, infructuous, as such proceedings remain within the scope of sections 446 and 457 of the Companies Act, 1956. The order refusing reference was therefore unsustainable, and the dispute was directed to arbitration before the named sole arbitrator. en-us Mon, 11 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:40:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99130 Proceedings under section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 are confined to examining the arbitration agreement and the making of a reference; the court cannot decide disputed issues on liability, such as alleged forgery of an acknowledgment or full payment of the debt, because those matters are for arbitration. The pendency of winding-up proceedings does not make an application under section 20, or an appeal from it, infructuous, as such proceedings remain within the scope of sections 446 and 457 of the Companies Act, 1956. The order refusing reference was therefore unsustainable, and the dispute was directed to arbitration before the named sole arbitrator. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 11 Mar 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99130