SUPER RELIGARE LABORATORIES LTD. vs GOOD HEALTH MEDICAL SERVICES LTD. — ARBIT.PETITON No. 12/2010
Case under Section PIL-W. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010211872010
Filing Date
12-Jul-2010
Registration No
ARBIT.PETITON No. 12/2010
Diary Number
21187/2010
Order Date
03-May-2012
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUPER RELIGARE LABORATORIES LTD.
Adv. NAVIN CHAWLA (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.GOOD HEALTH MEDICAL SERVICES LTD.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-May-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Apr-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Mar-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Sep-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Jul-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
02-May-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Apr-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Apr-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Dec-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Nov-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Sep-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Sep-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Jul-2010
Case filed
Registration No. ARBIT.PETITON No. 12/2010
Summary: Super Religare Laboratories Ltd. v. Good Health Medical Services Ltd. Case: Arbitration Petition No. 12 of 2010 Outcome: The Supreme Court disposed of the petition on May 3, 2012, by appointing arbitrators to resolve the dispute. The Court appointed Mr. Ravi Sodhi (Former Additional Advocate General of Punjab) as the first arbitrator and Mr. Trushar Bhavsar (Advocate) as the second arbitrator. These two arbitrators were directed to jointly appoint a third arbitrator. Background & Issue: Super Religare Laboratories (petitioner) provided reference testing services to Good Health Medical Services (respondent) but the respondent failed to pay outstanding invoices totaling Rs. 9,47,344.39 from July-November 2008. After a legal notice in February 2009 and an arbitration notice in January 2010 went unanswered, the petitioner filed this petition seeking arbitrator appointment under the agreement's arbitration clause. Key Direction: The arbitration venue is set as Mumbai (per agreement), though arbitrators may meet elsewhere. The Registry was directed to communicate the order to the arbitrators to expedite proceedings. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts