Supreme Court: Senior counsel appearing for Nirmohi Akhara, one of the parties in the Ayodhya title dispute case, told the Supreme Court that there was a temple in the inner courtyard of the disputed site.
Senior Advocate S K Jain told a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi that Muslims were not allowed to enter the temple area.
“There was no mosque there. As per the revenue records, it can be said that the land was in possession of the Nirmohi Akhara,”
The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ is conducting a day-to-day hearing in the Ayodhya title dispute case, after it had on August 2 observed that since the mediation panel on Ayodhya matter has failed to achieve any final settlement in the matter, it will hold a day-to-day hearing in the case from August 6.
Fourteen appeals are pending before the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict which ordered equal division of the 2.77-acre disputed land in Ayodhya among the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
The 16th-century Babri Masjid was demolished on December 6, 1992.
(Source: ANI)
More from the day-to-day hearing in Ayodhya Title Dispute:
No Muslim has entered the disputed land since 1934: Nirmohi Akhara
SC seeks evidence of possession of Ramjanmabhumi from Nirmohi Akhara
Both Hindus & Muslims have always called the disputed site a ‘Janmasthana’: Ram Lalla’s counsel
SC rejects Sr Adv Rajeev Dhavan’s plea against 5-days a week hearing
Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site
Excavations show that a massive Lord Ram temple existed at the disputed site: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Babri Masjid was built either on the ruins of Ram Mandir or by pulling it down: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Also read:
Should Ayodhya dispute be decided by mediation? SC to decide on March 6 [Full Report]