Kottar R.C. Diocese-rep. by its Bishop vs A. Siluvairayan and 2 Ors. — 701226/2004
Case under Ia/11/2025 Classification : Substituted Service Petition Section Kottar R.C. Diocese-rep. by its BishopS. Christudoss. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNKK040000302004
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
701226/2004
Filing Date
22-11-2004
Registration No
701226/2004
Registration Date
22-11-2004
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari
Judge
8-II Additional District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kottar R.C. Diocese-rep. by its Bishop
Adv. Adv A.Gnana Sekar
Holy Family Church rep. by its Bishop
Respondent(s)
A. Siluvairayan and 2 Ors.
M. Gaanamani
Adv. Adv X.P.Durairaj
S. Christudoss
Adv. Adv X.P.Durairaj
Hearing History
Judge: 8-II Additional District Munsif
Evidence
Evidence
Part Heard
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 27-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 24-04-2026 | Part Heard |
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary The cross-examination of the plaintiff witness has been concluded. The court has rejected most of the documentary exhibits (Annexures 1-50) as inadmissible under the Indian Evidence Act, finding them either irrelevant to the case, lacking proper authentication, or unrelated to the defendants. The petition is dismissed, with the court holding that the plaintiff has failed to establish any valid grounds to challenge the defendant's administration of the church property under established long-standing practices and constitutional protections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The cross-examination of the plaintiff witness has been concluded. The court has rejected most of the documentary exhibits (Annexures 1-50) as inadmissible under the Indian Evidence Act, finding them either irrelevant to the case, lacking proper authentication, or unrelated to the defendants. The petition is dismissed, with the court holding that the plaintiff has failed to establish any valid grounds to challenge the defendant's administration of the church property under established long-standing practices and constitutional protections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts