https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99826 An arbitration agreement entered into by a company remains operative after winding up because liquidation does not extinguish the company's juristic identity or prior contractual obligations. Section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 preserves the winding-up court's jurisdiction to entertain claims by or against the company, and the existence of an arbitration clause does not by itself oust that jurisdiction. The clause is not repugnant to section 446; at most, the court may consider whether a dispute should be stayed and referred to arbitration on a proper application. en-us Thu, 11 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:25:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99826 An arbitration agreement entered into by a company remains operative after winding up because liquidation does not extinguish the company's juristic identity or prior contractual obligations. Section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 preserves the winding-up court's jurisdiction to entertain claims by or against the company, and the existence of an arbitration clause does not by itself oust that jurisdiction. The clause is not repugnant to section 446; at most, the court may consider whether a dispute should be stayed and referred to arbitration on a proper application. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 11 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99826