Skip to content
Legal Research And Analysis

Legal Research And Analysis

Stay Connected ! Stay Informed !

  • Home
    • ABOUT US
      • ADVISORY BOARD
        • EDITORIAL BOARD
          • Governing Body
            • Terms Of Use
  • Legal Research and Analysis Journal
  • LRASJ
  • Free Courses
  • LRA Law Firm
  • LRAWOMEN
    • LRAWOMEN Volunteers Program
  • Notice Board LRA
  • Search
  • Toggle search form
  • Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Way towards peace or destruction- a different perspective Blog
  • The National Anti-Doping Bill, 2021, will be debated in the Lok Sabha.
    The National Anti-Doping Bill, 2021, will be debated in the Lok Sabha. current affairs
  • "Testing Our Patience": Supreme Court Ultimatum To Centre Over Tribunals
    “Testing Our Patience”: Supreme Court Ultimatum To Centre Over Tribunals current affairs
  • The Japanese Parliamentary election is currently in progress.
    The Japanese Parliamentary election is currently in progress. current affairs
  • CURRENT AFFAIRS
    CURRENT AFFAIRS; May 30th, 2022 current affairs
  • CURRENT AFFAIRS; Ten Second readout
    CURRENT AFFAIRS; Ten Seconds readouts current affairs
  • "Worth 100 men": Women dress in vibrant robes for the Haj without guardians
    “Worth 100 men”: Women dress in vibrant robes for the Haj without guardians current affairs
  • New research indicates poaching has led to more elephants being born tuskless. During the Mozambican civil war, 90% of elephants in Gorongosa National Park were killed for their ivory. Animal Poaching
Ayodhya Title Dispute:- M Siddiq v Mahant Suresh Das,9th Nov 2019

Ayodhya Title Dispute:- M Siddiq v Mahant Suresh Das, 9th Nov 2019

Posted on July 13, 2022July 13, 2022 By Sabina Nafees Nafees
0 0
Read Time:5 Minute, 12 Second
Ayodhya Title Dispute:- M Siddiq v Mahant Suresh Das,9th Nov 2019
Images; Picture; Representative image/ Sources LRA E ARCHIVES

PARTIES

Petitioners: M. Siddiq (Deceased); Maulana Asshad Rashidi; Sunni Central Board of Waqfs.

Lawyers: Rajeev Dhavan; Raju Ramachandran.

Respondents: Mahant Suresh Das; Nirmohi Akhara; Bhagwan Shri Ram Virajman; Uttar Pradesh; District Collector (Faizabad); City Magistrate (Faizabad); Superintendent of Police (Faizabad); All India Hindu Mahasabha; Arya Maha Praseshik Sabha; All India Sanatan Dharam Sabha.

Lawyers: Tushar Mehta; Subramaniam Swamy; CS Vaidyanathan; Ranjit Kumar; K Parasaran; Harish Salve.

Case-Number: CA 10866-10867/2010

Civil Appeal Nos. 10866-10867 of 2010, 4768-4771, 2636, 821, 4739, 4905-4908, 2215, 4740, 2894, 6965, 4192, 5498, 7226 and 8096/2011

Decided On: 09.11.2019

Appellants: M. Siddiq (D) thr. L.Rs. v/s. Respondent: Mahant Suresh Das and Ors.

———————————————————–

Introduction:-

The Ayodhya dispute which is also known as ‘Ram Janmabhoomi Vivad’ was one of the most famous disputes in the socio-religious history of India. The dispute was related to the plot of land in the district Ayodhya, U.P, which is regarded as the birthplace of Bhagwan Ram.

Hindus believe that in the sixteenth century the Babur demolished the temple situated at the birthplace of Ram and built a Mosque which is known as Babri Masjid.

The mosque was demolished by a Hindu mob in 1992 following a long campaign of religious agitation. over the years the matter has been brought up by both groups in various courts of the country.

The dispute came to end by the verdict of the Supreme Court which unanimously ruled that the disputed land be given to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas for construction of the Temple and the Muslim side be compensated with five acres of land at a prominent site in Ayodhya to build a mosque. Recently Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi laid the Foundation stone for the construction of the Ram temple.

The Fact of the case:-

The first recorded legal history of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute was in 1885 when Mahant Raghubar Das filed a suit before the court. The relief that sought was permission to build a temple Ram Chabutra situated outside the courtyard. He could not succeed because he had failed to present evidence of title to establish ownership of the Chabutra.

In 1934, there was another conflagration between the two communities. The mosque was damaged during the incident but it was subsequently repaired at the cost of the colonial government. In 1949 a dispute arises when the Idol of Lord Ram was placed in the mosque. Due to a law-and-order problem the magistrate lockdown the area for both communities.

The public was only allowed Darshan from beyond the grill brick wall. in 1950 and 1959 a suit was instituted before a civil judge at Faizabad claiming the absolute right to manage worship places.

In 1961 Muslim residents and the Sunni Waqf Board filed a suit seeking a declaration that the entire disputed site of the Babri Masjid was a public Mosque and for the delivery of possession upon removal of the idols. In 1986 a suit was instituted for allowing Darshan within the inner courtyard.

The court allowed to provide access to devotees for Darshan inside the structure. In 1989 another suit was filed by the deity Lord Ram through a next friend for a declaration of title to the disputed site and to restrain the defendants from interfering with or raising any objection to the construction of the temple.

The suits were transferred to the high court of judicature. Allahabad where a three judges’ bench was constituted for the trial of the suites. An interim order was passed by High Court to maintain the status quo with respect to the property in dispute.

During the pendency of the proceeding state of U.P. acquired 2.77 acres comprising disputed land. A substantial change took place on 6 December 1992 when a large crowd destroyed the mosque, the boundary wall, and the Ram Chabutra. A makeshift Structure Temple was constructed at the please under the central dome.

The idol of Ram Lalla was placed there. After analyzing the various oral, documentary, and other scientific evidence from the Archaeological Survey of India the full bench of the High Court held at all the three sets of parties- Muslims, Hindus, and Nirmohi Akhara as joint holders of the disputed premises and allotted a one-third share to each of them in a preliminary decree.

Other suits were dismissed as Being barred by limitation. The aggrieved parties preferred to appeal against the judgment of the High Court. The Supreme Court 2011 admitted the appeal and stayed the operation of the judgment. The parties were directed to maintain the status quo with respect to the disputed premises.

The court 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2017 issued directions for summoning the digital records of the evidence and pleadings from the Allahabad High Court and for Furnishing translated copies to the parties, after disposing of the Ismail Farooqui case the court has constituted five judges’ bench to hear the appeals in the meantime.

Court constituted a panel of a mediator to mediate the dispute within the stipulated period of time. The panel could not settle the dispute amicably. Ultimately the supreme court held a final hearing on the case from 6 August 2019 to 16 October 2019.

Judgment:-

The five judges’ bench of the supreme court unanimously pronounced its verdict on 9 November 2019. The court ordered the land to be handed over to a trust to be constituted by the government of India to build the Ram Mandir.

It also ordered the government to allocate five acres of land to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for the construction of a mosque at a suitable place within Ayodhya. The court held that Muslim parties failed to establish exclusive possession of disputed land.

At the same time, Hindu parties furnished better evidence to prove that Hindus had worshipped continuously inside the mosque, believing it to be the birthplace of the Hindu deity Rama.

The court rejected the claim made by the Shia Waqf board against the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for the ownership of the Babri Masjid. On 12 December 2019, the supreme court dismissed all the 18 petitions setting a review of the verdict.

Share

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn

About Post Author

Sabina Nafees Nafees

Sabuuu788@gmail.com
https://legalresearchandanalysis.com/
Happy
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 0 %
Civil, Judgement, legal, LRA Explains, Property Law Tags:Ayodhya Dispute, Babri Masjid, Ram Janambhoomi

Post navigation

Previous Post: Emmanuel Macron is ‘appreciative’ to support Uber’s lobbying efforts in France.
Next Post: Malala Yousafzai, the Youngest Recipient of a Nobel Prize in 2014

Related Posts

  • Prostitution and other activities in the sex industries have been conceptualized as forms of labor, or at least as income-generating activities. Women choosing a profession as a  sex worker is to objectified in society. As labor, these activities are exposed to particular risks with respect to health, working conditions, exploitation, and stigmatization.
    Women have the right to choose their own profession, Even if it is a “sex worker” Article
  • DLSA, SAHIBGANJ
    INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE UNDER DLSA, SAHIBGANJ, JHARKHAND legal
  • EXTRA JUDICIAL KILLINGS: A DOWNFALL OF JUSTICE? Blog
  • James Webb Space Telescope Captures Stunning Image Of Cartwheel Galaxy
    James Webb Space Telescope Captures Stunning Image Of Cartwheel Galaxy LRA Explains
  • Some facts about Property Law
    Some facts about Property Law Legal Updates
  • Defendants Who Have Not Filed Written Statements Can Be Permitted To Cross Examine Witnesses After Ex Parte Decree Is Set Aside: The Supreme Court.
    Defendants Who Have Not Filed Written Statements Can Be Permitted To Cross Examine Witnesses After Ex Parte Decree Is Set Aside: The Supreme Court. Civil
  • Ernst Rusko-Inventor of the Electron Microscope.
    Ernst Rusko-Inventor of the Electron Microscope. LRA Explains
  • DIVERSIFICATION OF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN THE COMING ERA
    DIVERSIFICATION OF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN THE COMING ERA Article
  • What exactly is a RAMSAR Wetland Site?
    What exactly is a RAMSAR Wetland Site? Blog
  • ROLE OF GATEKEEPERS ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
    ROLE OF GATEKEEPERS ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Blog

Quick Search

Visit Our Store

Categories

RECENT POSTS

  • Kenyan General Elections,2022
  • According to the ministry, US invading forces steal more than 80% of Syria’s oil.
  • Mexican President recommends a global peace commission comprised of three leaders, including Prime Minister Modi.
  • 60% of the EU and UK are under drought warnings or alerts.
  • DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SIGNIFICANCE: POWER AND FUNCTIONS IN THE LIGHT OF UP URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT 1973

Empirical Research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsL2WcsDuRU

    Log in

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org

    Sign up

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org

    • LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA: A SOCIO – LEGAL ANALYSIS Blog
    • Legal Research & Analysis
      FEMINISM- WHY DO WE STILL NEED IT? Article
    • Xi Jinping places a bet on Russia; China’s backing for Vladimir Putin’s war is all about its contest with America.
      Xi Jinping places a bet on Russia; China’s backing for Vladimir Putin’s war is all about its contest with America. LRA Explains
    • Hundreds of thousands flee Putin’s assault on Ukraine as temperatures drop. Putin's war in Europe
    • Robert Durst, convicted murderer and star of HBO’s “The Jinx,” died in the courtroom for the verdict of Elizabeth Holmes
      Robert Durst, convicted murderer and star of HBO’s “The Jinx,” died in the courtroom for the verdict of Elizabeth Holmes current affairs
    • These ancient trees persisted for nearly 200 million years until they all but vanished. Now they line city streets.
      Ginkgo trees nearly went extinct. Here’s how we saved these ‘living fossils.’ current affairs
    • Women Empowerment
      Women Empowerment Article
    • California wildfire burns over 900 acres hundreds of homes threatened
      California wildfire burns over 900 acres hundreds of homes threatened current affairs

    Copyright © 2022 Legal Research And Analysis.

    Powered by PressBook News WordPress theme

    Terms and Conditions