‘Moulding of relief’ affidavits for Ayodhya filed in Supreme Court

The All India Hindu Mahasabha and other Hindu parties to the Ayodhya dispute on Saturday filed an affidavit in the land dispute case on ‘moulding of relief’ in the Supreme Court. The Hindu Mahasabha and other Hindu parties in their affidavits have told the court how they would like to manage the property post-verdict. So did the Muslim parties to the dispute who have jointly filed their alternative demands on ‘moulding of relief’ in sealed envelopes. This post explains when such affidavits are warranted.

While securing the judgment in the Ayodhya case, the Supreme Court had directed all the parties to file a written affidavit in three days on the “moulding of relief”.

Haji Mehboob, a party to the dispute, made an interesting statement outside the Supreme Court on Friday, saying even if the verdict goes in favour of the Muslim side, no mosque will be built at that place. “We will just put up a boundary and leave it. We will think and consider what to do on that ground,” Mehboob said, adding, “It is my wish to have peace in the country.”

What is ‘moulding of relief’?

The provision of moulding of relief applies to cases involving civil suits. If a petitioner does not get the demand he made of the court, the moulding of relief states the options that can be given to him in lieu thereof.

As far as the Ayodhya case is concerned, if the ownership of the disputed land goes to one of the parties, what do the other parties get? Through an affidavit, every party to the dispute can let the court know these demands.

There is still scope for stretching the case

Since the last day of the hearing, the nation has been eagerly waiting for the end of another four weeks by when CJI Ranjan Gogoi has said the bench would finish writing the judgment. Chief Justice Gogoi, who also heads the Constitution Bench, is retiring on 17 November. The decision is expected before that.

If the verdict is not reached before the Chief Justice retires, as per the rules, the case will be heard all over again. In such an event, a bench will have to be constituted afresh and the whole process will start anew. However, it is expected that the decision will come by 17 November.