Ayodhya Case: Since 1854, the British government was giving grants for the maintenance of the Masjid, why did not the Hindus claim from 1885 to 1989? Argument of muslim side

0
Ayodhya Case: Since 1854, the British government was giving grants for the maintenance of the Masjid, why did not the Hindus claim from 1885 to 1989? Argument of muslim side
Ayodhya Case: Since 1854, the British government was giving grants for the maintenance of the Masjid, why did not the Hindus claim from 1885 to 1989? Argument of muslim side

Ayodhya Case: Since 1854, the British government was giving grants for the maintenance of the Masjid, why did not the Hindus claim from 1885 to 1989? Argument of muslim side: The hearing of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute began once again in the Supreme Court after the Dussehra holidays. During this time, the Muslim parties alleged that the questions are not being questioned from the Hindu side but only from them. Senior advocate Rajiv Dhawan, appearing for the Muslim parties, said this when the 38th day hearing began before a five-member constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.

Meanwhile, while presenting his side at the disputed site, he said that from the year 1854 the British government was giving a grant for the maintenance of the mosque, but from 1885 to 1989 the Hindu parties never claimed it. He said that where there is a mosque, there is no evidence that the temple was broken.

Also Read this:   Beed Collector Imposed A Fine Of Rs 5000 On Himself, Know What Is The Reason

The Survey of India (ASI) also found nothing in the investigation. Meanwhile, Justice DY Chandrachud asked Rajiv Dhawan what he would say about the occupation of the Hindu side in the outer courtyard. The documentary evidence of the year 1858 shows the establishment of Ram Chabootare. In response to this, Dhawan, a lawyer for the Muslim side, said, “Muslims have been coming continuously from the eastern gate and the only right they had was to pray and nothing else.”

Other members of the Constitution Bench include Justice SA Bobde, Justice Dhananjay Y Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazir. Dhawan said, “Hon’ble Judge did not ask questions from the other side. All questions have been raised from us only. We will definitely answer them. ‘

Also Read this:   Indian Idol 11: Neha kakkar performs pooja for indian idol season 11 shubh aarambh

Dhawan’s statement was strongly contested by senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan, representing Ram Lala, and said, “This is completely unwarranted.” The purpose of installing the key grill was to separate the inner porch from the outer porch.

Please tell that the constitution bench started hearing on this matter on Monday, the 38th day after the Dussehra holiday, which will continue till October 17. The Constitution Bench is hearing 14 appeals filed against the Allahabad High Court’s September 2010 verdict ordering the equal sharing of 2.77 acres of disputed land between the three parties – Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lala – in Ayodhya.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here