How parties staked their claims on disputed Ayodhya land

 Once a mosque, always a mosque: Prayers were stopped in 1950, but there is no concept of abandoning a mosque  Hindu parties only staked claim to right to worship in 1950 suits, not title.
Stone slabs prepared for the proposed temple in Ayodhya (Photo | Shekhar Yadav, EPS)
Stone slabs prepared for the proposed temple in Ayodhya (Photo | Shekhar Yadav, EPS)

Ram Lalla & Nirmohi Akhara

Legal Team: K Parasaran  C S Vaidyanathan  SK Jain

Arguments

  •  The disputed 2.77 acres is the birthplace of Lord Ram

  •  Janamsthan possesses a juridical personality. 

  •  Hindus believe the spirit of Lord Ram resides in Janamsthan

  •  Faith of the devotees is evidence that the Janamsthan is the birthplace of Lord Ram

  •  An idol is not necessary to confer juristic personality 

  •  A claim of possession can be based on religious practices, beliefs and ancient customs

  •  ASI report shows images of humans, animals inside structure

  •  Islamic law prohibits construction of a mosque by demolishing other structures

  •  The suit filed by Sunni Wakf Board in 1961 is time-barred

Sunni Wakf Board

Legal Team: Rajeev Dhavan  Shekhar Naphade  Meenakshi Arora 

Arguments

  • Once a mosque, always a mosque: Prayers were stopped in 1950, but there is no concept of abandoning a mosque  

  • Hindu parties only staked claim to right to worship in 1950 suits, not title.

  • Right to title claimed in 1989 suit.

  • ASI report is only an opinion and not conclusive on the fact of temple below the mosque

  • Right of possession cannot be based on trespass, an act committed on Dec 23, 1949

  •  Hindus worshipped only in outer courtyard, idols were placed in the structure in 1949

  •  Mahant Raghubar Das’ suit was dismissed in 1855

  •  References in ancient scriptures cannot confer title

  •  Piece of land can’t be given juristic personality 

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com