HC stay on implementation of Babri verdict extended to Feb 15 | lucknow | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Sep 23, 2017-Saturday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

HC stay on implementation of Babri verdict extended to Feb 15

The Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court on Friday extended stay on the implementation of verdict in Babri Masjid-Ramjanma Bhoomi case up to February 15, 2011.

lucknow Updated: Dec 10, 2010 17:30 IST

The Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court on Friday extended stay on the implementation of verdict in Babri Masjid-Ramjanma Bhoomi case up to February 15, 2011. The verdict was delivered in September 30, 2010 and the three-month deadline on the stay was to expire on December 30.

While issuing order three-member special bench consisting of Justice SU Khan, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Justice VK Dixit fixed January 28, 2011 as the next date of hearing in three review applications filed by advocate M Ismail Farooqui.

Farroqui had moved petitions seeking review in the judgement on the suits of Rajendra Singh, Nirmohi Akhara and Bhagwan Ram Lala Virajman.

While delivering judgment on September 30, the bench had trifurcated the around 13450 sq feet disputed land and had also stayed the operation of order for three months. The disputed land was equally divided among three parties- Sunni Central Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ramlala Virajman.

The bench after hearing the parties on the objections to the preliminary decree reserved its order to be delivered later. The parties involved in the suit had raised set of objections against the delivery of 2-1 judgments, which had not decreed the suit completely in favour of anyone of them.

According to Section 2(2) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 –“decree” means “ the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as regards the court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final.”

The court also reserved its order on the objections filed by the Hindu Mahasabha, a party in the case, in connection with finalizing the decree after hearing the arguments of the counsel of the party. HS Jain, counsel for Hindu Mahasabha said that the proposed decree was vague and it should be in conformity to the provision of Civil Procedure Code.

The waqf board counsel Zafrayab Jilani’s pointed out that in the judgment the parties such as receiver Priyadutt Ram and Mahmood Ahmad who had died during the pendency of suit their names had been indicated to show as if they were alive. Jilani further indicated the bench that the judgment delivered by Justice SU Khan and Justice Sudhir Agarwal formed the basis of maps of Shiv Shankar Lal to have annexed by them respectively but had not been made part to the preliminary decree by them.

The Hindu Mahasabha, also a party in the case, had challenged the verdict in Supreme Court along with Ramlal Virajman. However, Jilani and MM Pandey the counsel for Bhagwan Sri Ram Virajman told HT that all three of appeals in apex court had been returned to the respective parties by the office of the Supreme Court on account of certain defects in them.