| Author |
Message |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Rajusk
Legend Username: Rajusk
Post Number: 65536 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 170.74.231.20
Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2018 - 09:27 am: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Rajusk: it is only a land dispute
aa okka sentence chaalu anukonta..Supreme court ki ..decision ivvadaniki October 29th week..fingers crossed.. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Andhrawala
Legend Username: Andhrawala
Post Number: 71206 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 152.51.48.1
Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2018 - 09:15 am: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
This is a good beginning for Hindus and positive outcome towards building Ram Temple anukuntaa Only worry occhi promotions lor eservations avasaram ledhu ani Supreme court seppindhi. Idhi SC/ST s ki against ani Mayavathi antunnaadhi alaa repu 2019 lo eeme PM aithee No Temple antaademoo No Signature |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Rajusk
Legend Username: Rajusk
Post Number: 65532 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 172.58.225.84
Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2018 - 07:40 am: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Three-judge Bench will decide the title dispute. No reference to larger Bench, Supreme Court holds by 2:1 majority |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Rajusk
Legend Username: Rajusk
Post Number: 65531 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 172.58.225.84
Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2018 - 07:40 am: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ijaz Maqbool, lawyer for the Petitioner, says Muslim community always said it is only a land dispute and it has to be dealt with accordingly. "Everyone has to accept the verdict. Majority judgement said the Observations made in 1994 are only in the Context of acquisition. Court made it clear these observations won't affect the title suit," he says |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Rajusk
Legend Username: Rajusk
Post Number: 65530 Registered: 02-2008 Posted From: 172.58.225.84
Rating: N/A Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2018 - 07:39 am: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
In 1994, the Supreme Court said that namaz could be offered anywhere and that a mosque was not necessary. The Supreme Court has refused to revisit its 1994 ruling that the government can acquire land that a mosque is built on. In the Ismail Farooqui judgement, the court had ruled then that namaz or prayers can be offered anywhere and a mosque is not essential. The ruling will not be referred to a larger bench, the three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said. It could also be one of the last verdicts that Chief Justice Misra deliver, before he retires. Misra ji..ide aakhri mauka eseyandi |