A.Paramanadham vs Rev Stepan Jayaraj — 63/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or7R1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd March 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 23-Mar-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTI070000902022

Filing Number

127/2022

Filing Date

02-Mar-2022

Registration No

63/2022

Registration Date

02-Mar-2022

Court

District Munsif Court, Tiruppur

Judge

6-Principal District Munsif

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Or7R1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.A.Paramanadham

    Adv. Sabarigeethan S

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Rev Stepan Jayaraj

  2. 2.The Tamil Nadu District Counsil of South India Assembly God Rev T.S.Rajasekar

  3. 3.The Tamilnadu District Counsel of South India Assembly God rep by its SecretaRev.J.Stanly Manikaraj

  4. 4.The Tamilnadu District Counsil of South India Assembly God rep by itsTreasurer Rev.P.Antony Rajan

  5. 5.The Tamil Nadu District Counsil of South India Assembly God rep by its Committe Member Christodoss

  6. 6.David Periyadurai

  7. 7.Andavar Selvam

  8. 8.Jebamani

  9. 9.German Raj

  10. 10.Arivukannan

  11. 11.Anbarasan

  12. 12.Panneer

  13. 13.David Selvakumar

  14. 14.Anand Allexander

Case History

  1. 23-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 05-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  3. 19-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  4. 05-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  5. 09-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  6. 11-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  7. 01-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  8. 28-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  9. 12-Nov-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

    Summary: This is a civil case (O.S. No. 63/2022) from the Principal District Court, Tiruppur, dated November 12, 2025, involving a dispute regarding church administration and the appointment of a priest. The witness (plaintiff Paramanandham, 62 years old) testified and was cross-examined by defendants 7-12, addressing questions about the AG Church's governance structure, his role as priest for 30 years, and the appointment of defendant 14 without his consent. The court recorded the witness's testimony, which was transcribed, read back to him, and signed by him after he confirmed its accuracy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  10. 12-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  11. 07-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  12. 15-Oct-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  13. 15-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  14. 06-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  15. 25-Sep-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  16. 25-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  17. 11-Sep-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  18. 11-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  19. 02-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  20. 26-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  21. 19-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  22. 11-Aug-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  23. 11-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  24. 05-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  25. 09-Jul-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  26. 09-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  27. 25-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  28. 17-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  29. 30-Apr-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  30. 10-Mar-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  31. 20-Feb-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  32. 20-Jan-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  33. 25-Nov-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  34. 29-Oct-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  35. 25-Sep-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  36. 02-Aug-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  37. 12-Jun-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  38. 06-Mar-2024

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  39. 08-Dec-2023

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  40. 20-Nov-2023

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  41. 30-Oct-2023

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  42. 05-Oct-2023

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  43. 08-Sep-2023

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  44. 02-Aug-2023

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  45. 27-Jun-2023

    For further Proceedings

    Principal District Munsif

  46. 06-Jun-2023

    For further Proceedings

    Principal District Munsif

  47. 28-Feb-2023

    For further Proceedings

    Principal District Munsif

  48. 06-Feb-2023

    For further Proceedings

    Principal District Munsif

  49. 23-Jan-2023

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  50. 09-Dec-2022

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  51. 18-Oct-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  52. 27-Sep-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  53. 11-Aug-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  54. 22-Jun-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  55. 09-Jun-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  56. 27-Apr-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  57. 01-Apr-2022

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  58. 02-Mar-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  59. 02-Mar-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 63/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: This is a civil case (O.S. No. 63/2022) from the Principal District Court, Tiruppur, dated November 12, 2025, involving a dispute regarding church administration and the appointment of a priest. The witness (plaintiff Paramanandham, 62 years old) testified and was cross-examined by defendants 7-12, addressing questions about the AG Church's governance structure, his role as priest for 30 years, and the appointment of defendant 14 without his consent. The court recorded the witness's testimony, which was transcribed, read back to him, and signed by him after he confirmed its accuracy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case