Ayodhya: Disputed land to be divided into three

Allahabad, Sep 30: The title suit filed by Sunni Waqf Board Law has been rejected by three-member Lucknow bench, comprised of Justice Sibghat Ullah Khan, Justice Sudhir Agrawal and Justice Dharam Veer Sharma, of Allahabad High Court.

Allahabad HC announced that the disputed land has to be divided into three parts. HC also declared that the land under the central dome was Ram Janmastan.

HC added that the one part of the land goes to Babri Committe and another part to Nirmoha Akhara, a Hindu religious institute.

Findings of Allahabad High Court

* Disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama
* Disputed structure built after the destruction of an old structre
* Old structure proved by ASI as an old massive Hindu structure
* The idols were placed in the building on the night of Dec 22nd and 23rd, 1949
* Disputed structure was built against Islamic tennets, therefore not a mosque

BJP welcomes Ayodhya verdict

Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP) has told that the verdict declared by Allahabad High Court was a positive development. BJP also decided a core meeting at 6.30 pm to discuss the situations.

RSS leaders told that it was not the time for celebration and called for peace.

HC announced that the disputed land has to be divided into three, where Babri Committee will get 1/3 of the land, Nirmohi Akhara 1/3 and Ram Janmasthan with another 1/3 part.

Babri Committee disappointed, moves to SC

The Babri Masjid committee told that it was disappointed with the Allahabad High Court's verdict and would move the Supreme Court.

HC announced that the disputed land has to be divided into three, one part goes to the Nirmohi Akhara, one to the Babri Committee and the other to the Ram Janmasthan (the central dome).
05:02PM

The three-member bench of Allahabad High Court has declared the verdict on the Ayodhya title suit. It is expected that the final judgement has more than 1000 pages and status quo have to be maintained over the next 3 months.But the final judgement is yet to published for the public.

After the verdict, some of the lawyers, who represented Hindu groups for the title suit claimed victory by showing victory signals. But it is not the final verdict and it is yet to be published. The initial reports reveals that the members of the three-member bench were having different views on this and it is believed that they expressed different views on the ownership of the land.

OneIndia News