Lucknow, Sep.30 (ANI): The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday delivered a verdict that has favoured the Hindu contention that Lord Ram's birthplace existed at the same place where his statue was discovered more than 60 years ago.
Ravi Shankar Prasad, one of the counsels in the Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit, came out of the court room, and said the Hindus have been contending this for a long time.The bench decided to divide the disputed 2.7 acres of land into three parts, with each of the three parties to the suit getting a part of it.
Ram Lala Virajman, the Sunni Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara, will each get one part of the disputed land.
The ownership of the disputed land has been divided as follows: (1) Ram Lala, the birthplace of Lord Ram, given to Ram Lala Virajman (2) Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabootra to Nirmohi Akhara and 3) The remaining part to be given to the Sunni Waqf Board.
Meanwhile, there will be a status quo in Ayodhya for three months during which a petition can be filed.
Even as the Supreme Court Bench wanted the involved parties in the Babri-Ram Janmabhoomi title suit to resolve the matter in an out of court settlement, Hindu and Muslim groups called upon the apex court and the Government that the matter should not be allowed to linger on further.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and All India Shia Personal Law Board (AISPLB) had called upon the court not to procrastinate the issue any further.
Speaking on behalf of AIMPLB, Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangimahali, Naib Imam of Lucknow said that "stalling the judgment at the behest of a third party when both main parties to the dispute eagerly await justice is inappropriate. The Board, therefore, hopes that its sentiments will be respected and heeded".
AISPLB president, Maulana Mirza Mohammmad Athar said that "hoping for an out of court settlement at the eleventh hour is too impractical a proposition. Both parties have already expressed their willingness to accept the verdict and move on to the next step, any bid to put the matter on hold hardly makes sense."
Hindu seers have also been against deferment of court's verdict.In Haridwar, an outfit of seers had demanded the verdict on Ayodhya title suits should be pronounced at the earliest and said that it should not be deferred further.
The first title suit in the case was filed in 1950 by one Gopal Singh Visharad, seeking an injunction for permitting 'pooja'(worship) of Lord Ram at the disputed site while the second suit was filed by Paramhans Ramchandra Das also in 1950 seeking the same injunction but this was later withdrawn.
The third suit was filed in 1959 by the Nirmohi Akhara, seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site from the receiver and the fourth one came in 1961 by UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs for declaration and possession of the site.
The fifth suit was moved on July one, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shri Ram Lalla Virajman also for declaration and possession. (ANI)