Ayodhya Title Suits Verdict On Sept. 24
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will pronounce its judgement on the 60-year-old Ayodhya title suits on September 24, a decision that may trigger a political fallout. The date for pronouncement of the
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will pronounce its judgement on the 60-year-old Ayodhya title suits on September 24, a decision that may trigger a political fallout.
The date for pronouncement of the judgement reserved by a special full bench comprising Justices S.U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D.V Sharma on July 26, was conveyed to the counsels appearing in the four title suits relating to the disputed site at Ayodhya.
The court will be addressing three issues - if there was a temple at the disputed site prior to 1538, if the suit filed by the Babri committee in 1961 is barred by limitation and whether Muslims perfected their title through adverse possession.
The first title suit was filed in 1950 by one Gopal Singh Visharad, seeking an injunction for permitting 'pooja' (worship) of Lord Ram at the disputed site.
The second suit was filed by Paramhans Tamchandra Das also in 1950 seeking the same injunction but this was later withdrawn.
The third suit was filed in 1959 by Nirmohi Akhara, seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site from the receiver.
The fourth suit was filed in the 1961 by UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs for declaration and possession of the site. The fifth suit was moved on July one, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla Virajman also for declaration and possession.
With one of these suits having been withdrawn, four title suits remained pending in the Faizabad civil court and in 1989, on an application moved by then then Advocate General of UP, these suits were transferred to the High Court.
Both the Centre and the Mayawati Government have been worried over the political fallout and the possibility of communal tensions erupting in the wake of the court verdict.
Deployment of additional paramilitary forces in UP as also in the communally sensitive areas in other parts of the country is being considered.
The Congress core committee had met here last Friday to discuss a contingency plan and had taken stock of various scenarios that may follow the crucial judgement.
In its report to the Court, the Archaeological Survey of India has pointed to the existence of a massive structure just below the disputed site.
Among the excavation yields, the report has mentioned stone and decorated bricks, mutilated sculpture of divine couple, carved architectural members including foliage patterns and circular shrine having pranjala (watershute), all indicating the existence of north Indian temples.
The report concluded that it was over the top of this construction during the early 16th century that Babri Masjid was constructed.
But the Sunni Central Waqf Board has been maintaining that the report is “vague and self-contradictory“.
The High Court special bench had concluded hearing of arguments on July 26 in which the two sides have been making rival claims over the ownership of Ayodhya land.
The Ramjanmabhoomi Trust has held that the disputed land was the birthplace of Lord Ram while Muslim organisations contended that it was the site of a 16th century mosque built by the first Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya, about 120 km from Lucknow.
The date for pronouncement of the judgement reserved by a special full bench comprising Justices S.U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D.V Sharma on July 26, was conveyed to the counsels appearing in the four title suits relating to the disputed site at Ayodhya.
The court will be addressing three issues - if there was a temple at the disputed site prior to 1538, if the suit filed by the Babri committee in 1961 is barred by limitation and whether Muslims perfected their title through adverse possession.
The first title suit was filed in 1950 by one Gopal Singh Visharad, seeking an injunction for permitting 'pooja' (worship) of Lord Ram at the disputed site.
The second suit was filed by Paramhans Tamchandra Das also in 1950 seeking the same injunction but this was later withdrawn.
The third suit was filed in 1959 by Nirmohi Akhara, seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site from the receiver.
The fourth suit was filed in the 1961 by UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs for declaration and possession of the site. The fifth suit was moved on July one, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla Virajman also for declaration and possession.
With one of these suits having been withdrawn, four title suits remained pending in the Faizabad civil court and in 1989, on an application moved by then then Advocate General of UP, these suits were transferred to the High Court.
Both the Centre and the Mayawati Government have been worried over the political fallout and the possibility of communal tensions erupting in the wake of the court verdict.
Deployment of additional paramilitary forces in UP as also in the communally sensitive areas in other parts of the country is being considered.
The Congress core committee had met here last Friday to discuss a contingency plan and had taken stock of various scenarios that may follow the crucial judgement.
In its report to the Court, the Archaeological Survey of India has pointed to the existence of a massive structure just below the disputed site.
Among the excavation yields, the report has mentioned stone and decorated bricks, mutilated sculpture of divine couple, carved architectural members including foliage patterns and circular shrine having pranjala (watershute), all indicating the existence of north Indian temples.
The report concluded that it was over the top of this construction during the early 16th century that Babri Masjid was constructed.
But the Sunni Central Waqf Board has been maintaining that the report is “vague and self-contradictory“.
The High Court special bench had concluded hearing of arguments on July 26 in which the two sides have been making rival claims over the ownership of Ayodhya land.
The Ramjanmabhoomi Trust has held that the disputed land was the birthplace of Lord Ram while Muslim organisations contended that it was the site of a 16th century mosque built by the first Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya, about 120 km from Lucknow.