• Home
  • Nation
More

    Muslim side denies judge’s 1886 observation favours Hindus

    Today's Latest

    Government is comitted to revive BSNL and make it profitable

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) The Centre on Wednesday informed the Lok Sabha that it was serious about the health...

    IT Act well-equipped to deal with hacking, spyware: Prasad

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) The government on Wednesday told Lok Sabha that it is committed to protecting the fundamental...

    Swiggy invests Rs 175 cr to set up 1,000 cloud kitchen in India

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) Food delivery major Swiggy on Wednesday said it has invested Rs 175 crore over a...

    Popular Today

    Trump impeachment: Witness says he was offered Ukraine minister’s post

    New York, Nov 20 (IANS) A key witness in the impeachment hearing against US President Donald Trump said on Friday...

    ‘Pink balls have been hand stitched to aid reverse swing’

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) The amount of reverse swing that the SG pink ball will aid has been a...

    JKB Infra and France Rail to collaborate for Indian station redevelopment

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) JKB Infrastructure has joined hands with French national railway company SNCF for the station redevelopment...
    India Updates
    India Updates is an independent news & Information website. Follow us for regular updates on News and Information.

    CJI says, Ayodhya dispute will conclude on or before Oct 18New Delhi, Oct 17 (IANS) The Muslim side, on the last day of hearing in the Ayodhya title dispute on Wednesday, refuted the Hindu side’s claim that the observation of a District Judge in 1886 was in their favour.

    Senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Muslim side, contended before the five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, that counsel of the Hindu side wrongly relied on the decision of the District Judge on March 18, 1886, to indicate the title was not denied by the judge by “making an observation it was too late to go into the issue”.

    - Advertisement -

    Dhavan submitted the fact remains that the Commissioner on November 1, 1886, specifically decided the Hindus had no title and that they only had a prescriptive title.

    The Hindu side had said the Muslim parties chose not to file an appeal against these findings, which has attained finality.

    “Therefore, burden of proof does not lie on the Hindu parties to show that they held the disputed property to be sacred. It is the duty of the Muslim parties to displace the said findings while dealing with facts nearer to their ken,” they had argued.

    To this, Dhavan said if a finding is in Muslims’ favour, then an appeal does not need to be filed.

    “Appeals do not have to be filed on observations where a finding has been made. The Commissioner firmly repudiated the decision of the District Judge, clearing ambiguities. This decision is binding on the Hindus who cannot derive succour from an overruled decision,” he submitted.

    He insisted that the illegal destruction of the building does not eliminate the right of the Waqf Board to demand the area.

    Arguing on the aspect of Mughal conquest, Dhavan said there were massive conquests, thousands in recorded history, within India by various rulers against each other, even when they were of the same faith. “Were these conquerors different because they were Hindus?… The Muslims settled in India from 1206. Babur fought an India-settled ruler (Sultan Ibrahim Lodi) and Muslims from outside and those who accepted Islam live here. If the argument is made that India can only be perceived Hindu, this argument is communal,” he told the court.

    Later, Dhavan argued on the historical wrong cited by Hindus. “Argument was made Indian people needed protection from conquerors who came from outside. Under the Constitution, the protection prioritized are for SC/ST/OBC, women and children, minorities, all religions and those under 5th and 6th schedule..,” he contended.

    The Muslim side, in its final argument, urged the court to grant it possession of the entire disputed site.

    After concluding the hearing on Wednesday, the top court has reserved its judgement in the Ayodhya title dispute.

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here

    Must Read

    Shah Rukh Khan’s daughter Suhana made debut in Short film

    New York, Nov 18 (IANS) : Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's daughter Suhana Khan has made her acting debut on...

    IT Act well-equipped to deal with hacking, spyware: Prasad

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) The government on Wednesday told Lok Sabha that it is committed to protecting the fundamental rights of citizens, including the...

    Swiggy invests Rs 175 cr to set up 1,000 cloud kitchen in India

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) Food delivery major Swiggy on Wednesday said it has invested Rs 175 crore over a period of two years to...

    Wipro along with University of Finlad will develop 5G tech

    Bengaluru, Nov 20 (IANS) Indian software major Wipro has tied up with the University of Oulu in Finland to develop 5G technologies, the IT vendor...

    Haldiram’s, Vedanta among bidders for Videocon Industries

    New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) Fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) firm Haldiram's and the Anil Agarwal-led Vedanta Group are among the bidders who have submitted...

    More Articles Like This