STATE OF UTTARAKHAND vs METHODIST CHURCH IN INDIA Advocate - PIYUSH GARG — FA/68/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) Section 96. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.

CNR: UKHC010055892025

Next Hearing

30th June 2026

Filing Number

FA/2777/2025

Filing Date

24-04-2025

Registration No

FA/68/2025

Registration Date

24-04-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPEAL ( 3 )

Sub-Category

UNDER SECTION 96 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) Section 96

Petitioner(s)

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Adv. C.S.C.

Respondent(s)

METHODIST CHURCH IN INDIA Advocate - PIYUSH GARG

OSMOND CHRISTOPHER SAMUEL

KENNETH JONES SAMUEL

Adv. VIVEK PATHAK,RACHIT TIWARI ARVIND VASHISHTA PIYUSH GARG

TONY SAMUEL

Adv. SIDDARTHA SAH

Hearing History

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

25-04-2025

FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236

30-06-2026

Order on Applications (Time Barred Cases) -250

10-11-2025

Order on Applications (Time Barred Cases) -250

08-10-2025

Order on Applications (Time Barred Cases) -250

06-10-2025

Order on Applications (Time Barred Cases) -250

Orders

04-05-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Case Summary: FA 68/2025 State of Uttarakhand v. Methodist Church in India The case was adjourned to 30.6.2026. The court issued directions for: (1) respondent no. 4 to engage substitute counsel within 48 hours due to prior counsel's elevation to bench, and (2) fresh notice to be served on respondent no. 1 within one week as service had not been effected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: FA 68/2025 State of Uttarakhand v. Methodist Church in India The case was adjourned to 30.6.2026. The court issued directions for: (1) respondent no. 4 to engage substitute counsel within 48 hours due to prior counsel's elevation to bench, and (2) fresh notice to be served on respondent no. 1 within one week as service had not been effected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case