New Delhi: The Supreme Court announces its ruling on a petition seeking postponement of the decision of the Supreme Court in the city of Allahabad in the dispute of Babri Masjid Ram Janambhoomi - fit the title at 2:00 on Tuesday. Completed bench of three judges of which consists of the Chief Justice of India St., Kapadia, and fairness and justice the world Aftab Radhakrishnan Kansas to hear the arguments of the various parties in the petition moved from Ramesh Chandra Tripathi to postpone the decision in the case so that it can efforts to reach out of court settlement.
Started senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi argument on behalf of Tripathi while the former attorney general Soli Sorabjee appeared for the Sunni Waqf Board. For the first time the Centre provided its position clear and told the court that the summit of the uncertainty surrounding the government must end.
The Supreme Court on Sept. 23 was ordered to remain on the status of the interim government address the lawsuit, which was scheduled to be launched by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court and published in this issue for further hearing on September 28. They remained the judges of the Supreme Court, which includes the bench of Justice RV Raveendran and Justice Gokhale hearing loss provision in the "public interest".
The Justice Raveendran of the view that the petition should be rejected while Tripathi Justice Gokhale, on the other hand, was of the opinion that he should issue a notice to explore the option of settlement.
However, Raveendran Justice, who was the head of the bench, and the virtues of going the opinion of Justice Gokhale. In the system, the judge said Raveendran, "when a judge has a difference of opinion, and tradition is the question of notice."
Before submitting his claim in the Supreme Court, Tripathi had moved the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court to postpone the verdict. But was rejected a petition submitted by three-judge special bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justice Unit Khan, Justice, and Justice Agrawal Sudhir Sharma, Dharam Veer.
The Supreme Court also imposed a fine of 50,000 rupees to Tripathi.
In the meantime, he claimed the Sunni Waqf Board said on Monday that the Ayodhya dispute can not be settled through talks between the parties to the conflict while moving a petition in the Supreme Court. And Akhara Nirmohi, too, is planning to move the Supreme Court to postpone the rule for a period of three months to facilitate out of court settlement.
And will be judged in the dispute of Babri Masjid Ram Janambhoomi - fit Title decide whether the 2.77 acres of land disputed Babri mosque stood before it was destroyed on December 6, 1992 belongs to the Sunni Waqf Board or the Central to Hindu Mahasabha Akhil Bharat.
Each party what they want:
Sunni Waqf Board: Viewer for the delay.
Nirmohi Akhara: We want to postpone for a period of three months in an attempt to reach a settlement out of court.
Hindu Mahasabha: opposed to the delay.
Gopal Visharad: Viewer for the delay.
At the same time, the European Union and Interior Minister P Chidambaram reviewed the security situation in Ayodhya and the meeting of senior officials from his ministry and security agencies in New Delhi on Tuesday.
0 comments:
Post a Comment