https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110599 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1993 does not automatically stay arbitration proceedings against a sick industrial company because such proceedings are not treated as a suit for recovery of money or other proceedings listed in that provision. The analysis distinguishes arbitration from the specific classes of proceedings barred under section 22(1) and notes that section 22(3) separately contemplates suspension of contracts, awards and similar instruments by the Board. The operative effect is that the appointment and continuation of arbitration cannot be interdicted solely on the basis of section 22(1), though relief may be sought under section 22(3) if an award is made. en-us Tue, 15 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:55:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110599 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1993 does not automatically stay arbitration proceedings against a sick industrial company because such proceedings are not treated as a suit for recovery of money or other proceedings listed in that provision. The analysis distinguishes arbitration from the specific classes of proceedings barred under section 22(1) and notes that section 22(3) separately contemplates suspension of contracts, awards and similar instruments by the Board. The operative effect is that the appointment and continuation of arbitration cannot be interdicted solely on the basis of section 22(1), though relief may be sought under section 22(3) if an award is made. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 15 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110599