Allahabad HC rules by majority that disputed land in Ayodhya be divided into 3 parts, say lawyers. Land to be distributed among Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara, party for `Ram Lalla’, say lawyers. Status quo will be maintained at the disputed site in Ayodhya for 3 months, claim lawyers Ravi Shankar Prasad and K N Bhatt (PTI).

Not satisfied with Ayodhya verdict; will move SC: AIMPLB

Allahabad: Minutes after the announcement of the Ayodhya verdict, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board on Thursday expressed its dissatisfaction with the decision of the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad HC and decided to approach the Supreme Court.

Speaking at the media gathering after the verdict, advocate for AIMPLB Zafaryab Jilani said, “No public resentment over the judgement is required over the verdict as AIMPLB has decided to move Supreme Court against it.”

Jilani added that, “The decision should not be a reason for disappointment. We hope that people will maintain peace and tranquillity and the matter should not be taken to the streets.”

He also said, “Two judges agreed that it was a mosque where namaz was being offered and the dispute is only about its construction date. This is why the court has handed one-third of the land to Waqf Board.”

Replying to a question about moving to SC, Jilani said, “We have decided to move the Supreme Court but we are not in a hurry. It is a 8,500 page judgement and we will take time to read it and prepare the case. We will talk to Supreme Court lawyers before appealing in the Supreme Court.”

Rejecting the Allahabad HC verdict, Jilani said, “We don’t agree to one-third formula given by the High Court and that is why we are moving to Supreme Court. We appeal for the complete decree.”

“SC’s verdict will be completely acceptable to us”, he added.

Regarding an out of court solution, Jilani said, “We are open for talks to anyone if a proposal comes but we will not accept surrender proposal as AIMPLB has already rejected it.”

Delhi Jama Masjid’s imam Bukhari also said that they will approach the apex court on the judgment.

More Under Finance

Posted Under

Category : Finance (3497)
Type : News (12694)
Tags : high court judgments (4051)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *