Ayodhya case: Supreme Court asks parties to file English translation of documents

Ram Janmabhoomi Babri Masjid title dispute hearing turns out to be a closed door affair

Ram Janmabhoomi Babri Masjid title dispute hearing turns out to be a closed door affair

The bench, also comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer, said it will deal with the instant matter as a "pure land dispute" and indicated that impleadment applications of those which were not before the High Court would be dealt with later.

It had rejected an attempt by the Sunni Waqf Board and members of the minority community to postpone hearing in the case till July 2019.

On the previous date of hearing in this case, senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Dushyant Dave and Rajiv Dhawan, had pleaded for the hearings to be deferred on grounds that the construction of the temple was part of the BJP's election manifesto in 2014.

The top court had asked the advocates on records (AoRs), dealing with as many 14 civil appeals against the 2010 judgement of the Allahabad High Court in the land dispute, to ensure that all requisite documents are translated, filed and numbered before the apex court Registry.

The bench, also comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, had made clear on 5 December past year that it would begin final hearing on the petitions from 8 February and had asked the parties to file the requisite pleadings in the meantime.

The Supreme Court has adjourned the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case till March 14.

More news: Stocks close with solid gains after volatile session, Dow +2.3%
More news: Chinese police spot suspects with surveillance sunglasses
More news: White House senior aide resigns following abuse allegations

Meanwhile, there are indications that some third parties have tried to explore possibilities of an out of court settlement.

To this, the bench intervened and said that "The same arguments can be made by them for you Dr. Dhavan".

At the fag end of hearing, the bench said that there was no point for Dhavan to get angry as the court had not asked for synopsis from anybody. "Devoting one-and-half hour every day will help in disposing of these cases", the bench said.

Some documents and translations are yet to be filed before the apex court. The judges wondered how they could be allowed to enter into a case that was "essentially a title suit".

Mehta said that the "appeals were ripe for the hearing" and over 524 exhibits have already been filed. "The incident relates to the Treta Yuga". He said the Board would present its case before the Supreme Court and abide by its verdict.

Recommended News

We are pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news.
Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper.
Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.