Supreme Court: Senior Advocate K Parasaran, appearing for the Ram Lalla, one of the parties in title dispute case, has told the Supreme Court that Lord Ram’s birth place need not be the exact spot but could also mean surrounding areas.
“Janmasthan need not be the exact spot but can also mean surrounding areas,”
Parasaran told the 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ that there was no dispute that the disputed site is the “Janmasthana” (birthplace). He maintained that both Hindus and Muslims have always called it a Janmasthana.
The counsel further contended that the high court had ordered partition of the disputed properties but no one had sought it.
“The rights of the entire area, that is 2.77 acres as a whole, had to be decided but the high court divided the property,”
A five-judge constitution 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:
No Muslim has entered the disputed land since 1934: Nirmohi Akhara
SC seeks evidence of possession of Ramjanmabhumi from Nirmohi Akhara
Also read:
Should Ayodhya dispute be decided by mediation? SC to decide on March 6 [Full Report]
