2.4 C
New York
Saturday 27 November 2021

Buy now


HomePoliticsIndiaRam Lalla's lawyer: Lord Ram's birthplace cannot be claimed

Ram Lalla’s lawyer: Lord Ram’s birthplace cannot be claimed

Ram Lalla Virajman, a deity which is one of the parties in the decades old Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, said that Hindus have always asserted and practised their right to worship at the Janamsthan or birthplace


New Delhi: The birthplace of Lord Ram at Ayodhya is itself a deity and no one can claim ownership right over the sacred place by merely putting up a structure like a mosque, a counsel for Ram Lalla told the on Wednesday.

Ram Lalla Virajman, a deity which is one of the parties in the decades old Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, said that Hindus have always asserted and practised their right to worship at the Janamsthan or birthplace.

A five-Judge bench headed by Chief Ranjan Gogoi, which was hearing the title dispute case on the 9th-day, was told by senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan, counsel for the deity, that neither Nirmohi Akhara nor the Muslim parties can take benefit of legal principal of adverse possession to claim ownership right over the 2.77 acre disputed land in Ayodhya.

The doctrine of adverse possession comes into play when a person, who does not have the title of the property but can become its owner on the ground of his possession, on the ground that the original owner did not evict him for 12 years.

“Hindus have always asserted their right to worship at the birthplace and therefore it cannot be a case of adverse possession. Adverse possession comes into effect in the case of an alienable property and here the property, being the birthplace, assumes the character of the deity and hence becomes inalienable,” Vaidyanathan told the bench also comprising Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

“If the property itself is the birthplace of Lord Ram then no one claim ownership right over it by merely putting up any structures like mosque,” Vaidyanathan said.

Vaidyanathan, who advanced his argument for almost five-days, concluded his submissions on Wednesday and referred to various judgement to buttress his point that no body can take benefit of adverse possession to claim ownership rights.

Opposing the claim of Hindu body Nirmohi Akhara, which was granted one-third of the disputed land by the Allahabad High Court, the counsel for the diety said: “Under the law, an idol is always considered as a perpetual minor and its Shabait (devotee) or trustee cannot alienate or claim right over the property on the ground of adverse possession as against their own deity.”

“The people were worshipping is good enough to show it that it was a temple and no one can demolish and put up a structure which according me is illegal and can claim the title through adverse possession,” Vaidyanathan said, adding that Sunni Wakf Board was claiming the ownership right.

He said there cannot be destruction of an idol and the temple, as the birthplace of the deity cannot be “desecrated”, “occupied” or “traded” in the manner as is being done by the High Court.

To this, the bench referred to the Ayodhaya case that an idol is the property which in this case has some “divine attributes”.

He said that even if the idol is broken or destroyed, its character remains intact, as it is considered immortal.

Vadiyanathan highlighted the primacy of the birthplace of Lord Ram by giving a hypothetical illustration and said, if an ordinary temple is getting submerged due to the construction of a dam, then can shift the idol to other place but here the case is different and such actions may face a backlash of the devotees because the birthplace itself is a deity and can’t be shifted.

“Ram Janambhoomi cannot be shifted to some other place. It is unique and the sanctity and the dignity are attached to this very place,” he contended.

The bench asked Vaidyanathan to explain or refer to some case judgements on whether is considered as a juristic person and if yes, which part–the or the congregation.

Vaidyanathan refers to some judgements said that to the best of his knowing cannot be considered as a juristic person.

Referring to the high court verdict of 2010, the senior lawyer said that it was found that neither the Sunni Wakf Board was registered nor the disputed property was in its name and one of the judges, in the verdict, even found interpolation of the revenue records.

“Three judges of the High Court have given their finding and most of the findings are in my favour. Therefore, the court should not interfere with those findings which are in my favour,” he said while concluding his arguments.

After the counsel for deity concluded the arguments, as many as two senior lawyers appearing for Hindu bodies were found to ill-prepared by the court which asked them to collate all relevant records and documents in a systematic manner, which they want to rely upon.

The bench, then asked senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for one of the original litigants Gopal Singh Visharad, who is seeking enforcement of his right to worship at the disputed place.

Kumar said a law suit was filed way back in 1950 by his Visharad, who used to pray at the birth place and after his death in 1986, his son Rajendra Singh has been exercising his right to Shabaitship (worshipper).

The hearing will resume on Thursday.

Fourteen appeals have been filed in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among the three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

Babri Masjid was demolished by right-wing activists on 6 December, 1992 in Ayodhya, leading to the protracted legal battle.

Sirf News needs to recruit journalists in large numbers to increase the volume of its reports and articles to at least 100 a day, which will make us mainstream, which is necessary to challenge the anti-India discourse by established media houses. Besides there are monthly liabilities like the subscription fees of news agencies, the cost of a dedicated server, office maintenance, marketing expenses, etc. Donation is our only source of income. Please serve the cause of the nation by donating generously.

Support pro-India journalism by donating via UPI to surajit.dasgupta@icici

Speedy Justice to Consumers! ⚖

With easy & simple e-filing of complaints, the e-Daakhil portal is providing hassle-free grievance redressal to consumers by protecting their rights across the country.

This is a major step towards empowering consumers.🛍


कांग्रेस के अजीज कुरैशी कहते हैं AMU मे जिन्ना की बड़ी फोटो लगे।अखिलेश यादव Jinnah को नेहरू, गांधी के बराबर का स्वतंत्रता सेनानी मानते हैं।
क्या यह साफ-साफ तुष्टीकरण की राजनीति नहीं है?
@Shehzad_Ind https://twitter.com/indiatvnews/status/1464561419702071296

India TV@indiatvnews

यूपी की लड़ाई धर्म पर कैसे आई ?

यूपी में दंगाई 'जिन्ना' के अनुयायी ?

'जिन्ना' चलेगा या गन्ना ?

#Muqabla LIVE with @Surbhi_R_Sharma

Guests- @Shehzad_Ind , @VijayVst0502 , @ameeque_Jamei , #MHKhan , @shadab_chouhan1

#UPPolitics #UPElection https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1RDGlgBzkldKL


PM @narendramodi congratulates IIGF’s efforts towards defining roadmap on internet governance

Future of Internet must be shaped by open societies sharing same set of democratic values and citizen right : @Rajeev_GoI


Centre's bid to curb crypto … Bill to regulate on the table.

Why does crypto need curbs? Should India just ban crypto? Find out from the best experts.

@Subhashgarg1960 & @DrArunaSharma6 join Rahul Shivshankar on CONVERSE INDIA @ 8:30pm.


@Shehzad_Ind ने कहा अखिलेश, राजभर और ओवैसी ये बिरयानी भाई जान का एजेंडा एक ही है हिन्दूत्व के नाम पर डराओ, भडकाओ और वोट कमाओ


Read further:

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

- Advertisment -