Ayodhya case purely a 'property dispute': Hindu bodies to SC


New Delhi, Apr 27 (PTI): Hindu religious bodies today told the Supreme Court that the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya was purely a "property dispute" and the issue of political or religious senstivities cannot be a ground to refer the matter to a larger bench.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer was told by senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for original plaintiff Gopal Singh Visharad who was among the first to file a civil suit in the case way back in 1950, that there was no need to refer the matter to a larger bench since a three-judge bench was already seized of it.

Salve said that as per the prevalent practices and traditions of the apex court, the appeals against orders passed by a full bench of any high court have always come up for adjudication before a three-judge bench of the top court, instead of a two-judge bench.

Senior advocate K Parasaran, appearing for the deity, Ram Lalla Virajman, also supported Salve's arguments and said the matter should be heard by a three-judge bench only.

Senior advocate Raju Ramachandaran, appearing for the Muslim bodies and petitioner M Siddiq, said that looking at the sensitivities of the matter and its sheer importance, the case should be referred to a larger bench.

The hearing remained inconclusive and would continue on May 15.

The special bench of the apex court is seized of a total of 14 appeals filed against the high court judgement delivered in four civil suits.

A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had in 2010 ordered that the land be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

  

Top Stories

Comment on this article

  • Vincent Rodrigues, Bengaluru/Katapadi

    Sat, Apr 28 2018

    This issue is purely religious and political and of not property dispute which is secondary.

    DisAgree Agree [1] Reply Report Abuse

  • Krishna Dasa, Udupi

    Sat, Apr 28 2018

    I am a Krishna Baktha. Lot of Krishna Temples are built all over the world and I do not want Krishna Temples demolished by any one in India or on foreign land so, we the Hindus should say sorry to Muslims and Krishna and rebuild Babri Masjid for Muslims

    DisAgree [1] Agree [5] Reply Report Abuse

  • Jossey Saldanha, Mumbai

    Sat, Apr 28 2018

    I wonder why BJP promised a Ram Mandir in Ayodhya ...

    DisAgree [1] Agree [3] Reply Report Abuse

  • AHMED, ALHASSA KAUP

    Fri, Apr 27 2018

    NOT ONLY BABRI MOSQUE EVERY ATOM OF UNIVERSE BELONG TO ALLAH INCLUDING ALL MANKIND .ONLY ONE GOD ALLAH ALL OTHER THINGS HIS CREATION ONLY .MAY ALLAH GUIDE MAN KIND STRAIGHT PATH.READ KORAN AVAIBLE IN ALL LANGUAGES EVEN IN KANNADA.

    DisAgree [4] Agree [12] Reply Report Abuse

  • Karthik Karkera, Maryhill Mangalore

    Sat, Apr 28 2018

    Shows your intolerance towards other religions . Also shows narrow mindedness

    DisAgree [1] Agree [2] Reply Report Abuse

  • Swamy, Mangalore

    Fri, Apr 27 2018

    India received sovereignty on Aug 15, 1947 12:00 hrs and then the Indian rule started. So whatever is in existence from that date onward belongs to India and have claim only from that time to Republic of India on any entity public or private and can not go back in time for claim. So clearly the Babri mosque which stands on that piece of land belongs to the mosque itself just like Taj Mahal, Qutub Minar, Red Fort etc. in turn belongs to govt of India.

    DisAgree [2] Agree [11] Reply Report Abuse

  • HENRY MISQUITH, Bahrain

    Fri, Apr 27 2018

    We all thought it was a matter of so-called "HINDU AASTHA"

    DisAgree Agree [10] Reply Report Abuse


Leave a Comment

Title: Ayodhya case purely a 'property dispute': Hindu bodies to SC



You have 2000 characters left.

Disclaimer:

Please write your correct name and email address. Kindly do not post any personal, abusive, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent, discriminatory or unlawful or similar comments. Daijiworld.com will not be responsible for any defamatory message posted under this article.

Please note that sending false messages to insult, defame, intimidate, mislead or deceive people or to intentionally cause public disorder is punishable under law. It is obligatory on Daijiworld to provide the IP address and other details of senders of such comments, to the authority concerned upon request.

Hence, sending offensive comments using daijiworld will be purely at your own risk, and in no way will Daijiworld.com be held responsible.