Ayodhya case is purely a land dispute: Various Hindu religious bodies informs Supreme Court

 Various Hindu religious bodies on Friday informed the Supreme Court that the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute was purely a land dispute.

Published: 28th April 2018 02:02 AM  |   Last Updated: 28th April 2018 04:07 AM   |  A+A-

Supreme Court (File | EPS)

By Express News Service

NEW DELHI: Various Hindu religious bodies on Friday informed the Supreme Court that the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute was purely a land dispute and the issue of political or religious sensitivities cannot be a ground to refer the matter to a larger bench.

A three-judge bench headed by  Chief Justice Dipak Misra 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 1950, that there was no need to refer the matter to a larger bench since a three-judge bench was already seized of the matter.

Nirmohi Akhara chief Mahant Dharam
Das speaks to media after the Ayodhya  
case hearing at the Supreme Court on
Friday | Shekhar Yadav 

Salve urged the court to consider it as a case of land dispute, and argued that it was not a matter of Constitutional importance.

READ | India has moved forward from 1992 Babri Masjid demolition: Hindu bodies to Supreme Court

“We are beyond 1992-1993. All that remains is a title dispute over property. It should be decided just like a title suit, and not on other grounds,”he contended.He said religious sensitivities and politics should not be brought up before the court.

This move is surprising considering that 14 appeals were filed against the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict which had treated the dispute like a title suit, distributing the disputed land in Ayodhya equally among the three plaintiffs.

Opposing Salve, senior advocate Raju Ramachandaran — appearing for the Muslim bodies — said looking at the sensitivities of the matter and its national importance, the case should be referred to a larger bench. 

The hearing remained inconclusive and would continue on May 15.

The SC earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen, and Teesta Setalvad, in the case.

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


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp