https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108433 Once a winding-up petition is presented, legal proceedings continued against the company after the winding-up order without leave of the company court, including arbitration-related execution, are void and unenforceable against the company in liquidation. The award itself was not disturbed on merits, but post-award enforcement could not proceed because section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires leave for such proceedings and the official liquidator is entitled to take charge of the assets. A third party's challenge was not governed by section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because it was not a party-arbitration challenge but one based on the company court's jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 18 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:05:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108433 Once a winding-up petition is presented, legal proceedings continued against the company after the winding-up order without leave of the company court, including arbitration-related execution, are void and unenforceable against the company in liquidation. The award itself was not disturbed on merits, but post-award enforcement could not proceed because section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires leave for such proceedings and the official liquidator is entitled to take charge of the assets. A third party's challenge was not governed by section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because it was not a party-arbitration challenge but one based on the company court's jurisdiction. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 18 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108433