Skip to content
Corporate Law / Winding Up

NCLT Power to Order Winding Up Despite Pending Arbitration

An analysis of the NCLT's jurisdiction to order winding up despite an arbitration clause, the exclusive domain of the just and equitable ground, and the limits of arbitrability.

29 Oct 20262 min read

A company's contractual documents may contain an arbitration clause, but the existence of the clause does not oust the NCLT's jurisdiction to order winding up. The NCLAT has held that merely because there is an arbitration clause in an agreement, the arbitrator would have no jurisdiction to pass a winding-up order on the just and equitable ground, which falls within the exclusive domain of the Tribunal under Section 271(e).

The Exclusive Jurisdiction

The winding-up jurisdiction is a statutory jurisdiction that affects the company as a whole, not merely the bilateral rights of the contracting parties. An arbitral tribunal cannot order the winding up of a company, and it cannot grant the remedies that the NCLT can grant under Section 271. The arbitration clause governs the contractual disputes between the parties, but it does not displace the NCLT's statutory jurisdiction.

The Devas Multimedia Case

The NCLT Bengaluru ordered the winding up of Devas Multimedia under Sections 271 and 272 on the ground that the company's affairs had been conducted in a fraudulent manner and that the company was formed for a fraudulent and unlawful purpose. The existence of an arbitration clause in the agreement between Devas and Antrix did not bar the winding-up petition, because the ground was the fraudulent conduct, not the contractual dispute.

The Limits

The NCLT's jurisdiction is not unlimited. The Tribunal cannot adjudicate disputed contractual claims during winding up if the contract contains an arbitration clause, and the NCLAT Chennai has held that a liquidator cannot seek adjudication of a disputed contractual claim if the contract provides for arbitration. The winding-up jurisdiction is confined to the statutory grounds, and it is not a substitute for the arbitral process.


Call to Action

Anuj Desai & Associates advises companies and creditors on the interaction between arbitration clauses and winding-up proceedings—from the exclusive jurisdiction of the NCLT to the limits of arbitrability and the Devas Multimedia principles. If you are considering a winding-up petition despite an arbitration clause, we can help you assess the position.

📧 office@anujdesaiassociates.com
📞 9619456656
🌐 https://anujdesaiassociates.com
🔗 linkedin.com/in/ca-anuj-desai-122547230

Article 131

Compliance Guidewinding up pending arbitrationarbitration clause winding upNCLT winding up arbitrationSection 271 arbitrationjust and equitable arbitrationDevas MultimediaAntrixNCLAT arbitrationarbitration ouster NCLTSection 8 Arbitration Actwinding up exclusive jurisdictionshareholder dispute arbitrationAnuj Desai & Associates
Share

Related insights

Work with ADA

Ready to talk to an advisor?

Book a consultation and get a clear, considered view from a team that handles audit, tax, regulatory and cross-border work under one roof.