Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ has asked the parties in the Ayodhya land dispute to come up with a tentative time schedule or date when the arguments can be concluded.
On the 25th day of the arguments, the Court asked all parties to apprise it as to when their arguments are likely to be completed, hinting that the court can pronounce the judgment as submissions are over. When senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Muslim side, sought a break in the hearing, the Court said,
“You (Dhavan) sit with your associates and inform about the number of days you will take to conclude your arguments,”
The Court also asked the Hindu parties as to how much more time will take to reply to Muslim parties.
During the course of the hearing, Dhavan read the pleadings of the Shia’s in order to show the position of Shia’s then and now. He submitted before the bench that there was no evidence to conclude that Lord Ram was born on the spot inside the central dome where the Babri Masjid once stood.
“There was no difference between Shias and Sunnis over the Babri Mosque and it was vested in Allah,”
Dhavan submitted some photos of Babri Mosque captured in 1950 in a bid to convince the court that the disputed land belonged to Muslims.
“We don’t have any objection to the Hindus, but the land belongs to us (Muslim side),”
A 5-judge bench 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:
SC slams Nirmohi Akhara for opposing Ram Lalla’s plea; Says you ‘stand’ or ‘fall’ together
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
There was a temple in the inner courtyard of the disputed site: Nirmohi Akhara
Also read:
Should Ayodhya dispute be decided by mediation? SC to decide on March 6 [Full Report]