Supreme Court rejects plea
Andhra Pradesh ~ India ~ International ~ City ~ Entertainment ~ Business ~ Sports ~ Technology ~ Health ~ Features
2010 Commonwealth Games ~ 2010 Nobel Prizes ~ Sachin Tendulkar ~ Rajasthan Royals ~ Kings XI Punjab ~ Sushil Kumar ~ Deepika Kumari ~ Somdev Devvarman ~ HR Bhardwaj
Home / India News / 2010 / September 2010 / September 28, 2010
Supreme Court rejects plea to defer Ayodhya verdict
RSS / Print / Comments

Top News

144 Section in Hyderabad ahead of Ayodhya verdict

18 killed, several injured as bus falls into river in Bulandshahr

Pak's flawed Afghan policy of support to terror groups will bite back hard: Editorial

Ajay Devgan prays for success of his film in Ajmer

Pranab Mukherjee seeks more financial sector reforms

Australia asks CWG organizers for better treatment at closing ceremony

Study to find whether leptin helps type 1 diabetic patients

New study confirms smoking, cancer link (reissue)

Supreme Court rejects plea to defer Ayodhya verdict

Rejecting an appeal that sought to defer the Allahabad Courts verdict on Ayodhya-Ramjanambhoomi title issue, the Supreme Court on Tuesday gave its nod to the courts Lucknow Bench to go ahead with its announcement of the judgment in the case.


New Delhi, Sep 28 (ANI): Rejecting an appeal that sought to defer the Allahabad Court's verdict on Ayodhya-Ramjanambhoomi title issue, the Supreme Court on Tuesday gave its nod to the court's Lucknow Bench to go ahead with its announcement of the judgment in the case.

Retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chandra Tripathi had petitioned in the court to defer verdict to allow an amicable settlement of the dispute between the two parties to the issue.

The Lucknow Bench now has two days to pronounce its verdict.

Earlier today, the apex court heard a plea seeking deferment of the Allahabad high court verdict in the Ayodhya title suit case.

Attorney General G E Vahanvati, appearing before a three-judge Special Bench headed by S.H.Kapadia, said the most preferred solution to the problem would be settlement but it has not taken place and the uncertainty, which is prevailing, should not be allowed to continue.

"Settlement, if any possible, we welcome it but we do not want any uncertainty," he told the bench.

The three-judge bench comprised Chief Justice of India S. H. Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan.

Earlier, the hearing started with senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi putting forth arguments on behalf of a retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chandra Tripathi on why the delivery of the verdict be postponed and efforts be made to reach an amicable settlement outside the court.

On Wednesday, the apex court refused to hear a plea to defer the Ayodhya verdict that was scheduled to be delivered on September 24.

An apex court's Bench said the matter would be taken up by another bench.

Tripathi, who had earlier lost his plea before the Allahabad High Court, approached the apex court, saying the verdict should be deferred till the end of the Commonwealth Games.

The petition also says that a large number of forces were needed to contain possible fallout as the verdict may result in communal tension, but the forces are busy in Commonwealth Games, Jammu and Kashmir and Bihar elections.

The Special Bench of the Allahabad High Court had on September 17 rejected a plea for deferment of the verdict and imposed a heavy fine on Tripathi.

The court had earlier reserved its judgment on July 26 in connection with the 60-year-old title suit.

The High Court had also imposed 'exemplary costs' of Rs. 50,000 terming Tripathi's effort for an out-of-court settlement of the dispute as a 'mischievous attempt'.

On July 27, the court took the initiative for an amicable solution to the dispute when it called on counsel for the contending parties to go into the possibility. But no headway was made.

The demolition of the 16th century mosque triggered widespread communal riots across the country in 1992-93.

ANI

Link to this page

Suggested pages for your additional reading
AndhraNews.net on Facebook






© 2000-2017 AndhraNews.net. All Rights Reserved and are of their respective owners.
Disclaimer, Terms of Service & Privacy Policy | Contact Us