IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA:

HYDERABAD * * *

Civil Revision Petition No.3701 of 2025 Between:

M/s.ESI Corporation, having its registered office at #5-9-23, Hill Fort Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderaabd – 500 063, Rep. by its State Medical Commissioner.

Appellant / Respondent VERSUS M/s.Quality Care India Limited (care hospitals), having its registered office at #6-3-248/2, Road No.1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500 0034, Rep. by its Senior Legal Manager, Syed Khaja Rahmatullah, and another Respondent / Petitioner ORDER PRONOUNCED ON: 21.11.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY 1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments? : Yes

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes

3. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Judgment? : Yes __________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J * THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY + Civil Revision Petition No.3701 of 2025 % 21.11.2025 # Between:

M/s.ESI Corporation Appellant / Respondent VERSUS M/s.Quality Care India Limited (care hospitals), and another Respondent / Petitioner ! Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mr.G. Pavan Kumar ^Counsel for the Respondent(s) : Mr.S. Ravi, learned Senior Counsel representing M/s.R.S. Associates

> HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred

1 O.M.P. (MISC.) (COMM.) 695 OF 2024, dated 13.11.2024, of the High Court of Delhi, at New Delhi

2 AP-COM – 296 of 2025, dated 13.09.2025, of the

High Court at Calcutta, Commercial Division, Original Side

3 Writ Petition No.88 of 2024, dated 07.08.2024, (Division Bench),

Of the High Court of Bombay at Goa.

4 2024 INSC 889

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY Civil Revision Petition No.3701 of 2025

ORDER :

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 24.03.2025 in Arbitration O.P.No.172 of 2023 passed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad (for short, ‘the impugned order’)

2. Heard Mr. G. Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr. S. Ravi, learned Senior Counsel representing M/s.R.S. Associates, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. Vide the impugned order, the Trial Court allowed the above A.O.P. by granting extension of period of (08) months from the date of order for completion of arbitral proceedings by the learned Arbitrator subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- payable to the District Legal Services Authority.

4. The above A.O.P. was filed by respondent No.1 under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 praying the Trial Court to pass an order directing respondent No.2-Arbitral Tribunal to extend the period of arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Case No.1 of 2019 for a further period of one year from the date of order by duly setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 16.01.2021 whereby the arbitration proceedings stood terminated between the petitioner and the respondent from 31.12.2020.

5. The operative portion of the impugned order is reproduced as under, viz., “21. The arbitral proceedings were terminated at the stage of cross-examination of respondent’s witnesses which goes to show that most of the proceedings were completed. If the proceedings not permitted to continue further the interest of petitioner would be put to jeopardy.

22. In view of the above discussion and reasons mentioned, it is a fit case to grant extension of period of (08) months from the date of this order for completion of arbitral proceedings by the same Hon’ble Arbitrator. The petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.5,000/- to DLSA. Accordingly, this point is answered.

In the result, petition is allowed extending of time of (08) months from the date of this order for completion of arbitral proceedings subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- to DLSA.”

6. The brief facts of the case is that respondent No.1 herein h