Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.

    SUBMIT

Thank you for
taking the pledge

But the job is not done yet!
Vote for the deserving candidate this year.

Check your mail to know more

Disclaimer:

Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
SPONSORED BY
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
»
2-min read

Paramhans Ramchandra Das, Ram Lalla Virajman, Prince Anjum Qadar: The Faces of Ayodhya Dispute

The suit started in 1950 when Gopal Singh Visharad filed a title suit with the Allahabad High Court seeking injunction to offer puja (prayers) at the disputed site.

Debayan Roy | News18.com

Updated:December 5, 2017, 7:48 AM IST
facebookTwittergoogleskypewhatsapp
Paramhans Ramchandra Das, Ram Lalla Virajman, Prince Anjum Qadar: The Faces of Ayodhya Dispute
(Image: Network18)
Loading...
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will begin holding day-to-day hearings in the Babri Masjid title dispute from Tuesday, but confusion continues on the parties to the suit.

With parties impleading themselves in the case with each hearing since the 1950s, News18.com takes a look at the plaintiffs and defendants in the original suit and how the case shaped up till 2010 when the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court divided the property into three equal parts between the Nirmohi Akhara, Sunni Waqf Board and Ram Lalla Virajman.

The suit started in 1950 when Gopal Singh Visharad filed a title suit with the Allahabad High Court seeking injunction to offer puja (prayers) at the disputed site.

In 1959, another suit was filed by Paramhans Ramchandra Das against Zahoor Ahmad and seven others. The first five defendants were Muslims, residents of Ayodhya. Defendant No.6 was the state of UP and defendant No 7 was Deputy Commissioner, Faizabad. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs was added as defendant No.8 in 1989. This suit was later withdrawn and treated as dismissed in the 2010 verdict.

The next suit was filed by Nirmohi Akhara through its mahant. After the death of original the mahant, his chela was substituted.

Defendant No 1 in the suit initially was Babu Priya Datt Ram. Thereafter, the new receiver, Sri Jamuna Prasad, was substituted in his place by a court order in October 1989. The suit of Nirmohi Akhara is carried forward by its mahant.

The next suit was filed by the Sunni Central Board of Waqfs, UP and nine Muslims of Ayodhya, most of whom have died. Some of them have been substituted in the case and some not.

In this suit, one of the defendants was Prince Anjum Qadar, President of the All India Shia Conference.

The last suit was filed by Bhagwan Sri Ram Birajman at Sri Ram Janam Bhoomi Ayodhya, Asthan Sri Ram Janam Bhoomi, Ayodhya and Sri Deoki Nandan Agarwala, a senior advocate and retired High Court judge.

Some of the defendants in the case included the state of UP, Collector, City Magistrate and SSP, Faizabad, Presidents of All India Hindu Mahasabha, All India Arya Samaj, All India Sanatan Dharma Sabha, Ram Janam Bhoomi Nyas and Shia Central Board of Waqfs.

The Shia Personal Law Board is supporting the decision of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board in the case. However, both are not the party in the case. In fact, the 2010 verdict held the property to be a Sunni property.
| Edited by: Puja Menon
Read full article
Loading...
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch

facebookTwittergoogleskypewhatsapp
 
T&C Apply. ARN EU/04/19/13626
 

Live TV

Loading...
Countdown To Elections Results
  • 01 d
  • 12 h
  • 38 m
  • 09 s
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results