What's new

'Mosque can be built at a reasonable distance from Ram Janmabhoomi,' says Shia Wakf Board

unbiasedopinion

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
-27
Country
India
Location
India
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...gress-blames-bjp-rss/articleshow/59970007.cms


HIGHLIGHTS
  • The Board further told the SC that it was the only one entitled to negotiate an amicable settlement of the dispute
  • 'This intervention by the Shia Waqf board is god sent, said Rajya Sabha member Subramanian Swamy
59969982.jpg

NEW DELHI: Uttar Pradesh's Shia Central Waqf Board told the Supreme Court (SC) On Tuesday it is okay with a mosque built in a Muslim dominated area that is at a reasonable distance from the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi site.

In an affidavit, the Board further said the SC that the Babri Masjid was its property and therefore it was the only one entitled to negotiate an amicable settlement of the dispute

The 30-page affidavit assumes significance as it has been filed within few days of the apex court agreeing to fast track the hearing on a batch of appeals challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict on the land dispute in the case, said PTI. The Shia Board is one of the parties in the pending appeals in the apex court.

The Board also sought time from the SC to set up a committee to explore an amicable settlement of the Ayodhya dispute.


"According to me, this intervention by the Shia Waqf board is god sent," said Rajya Sabha member Subramanian Swamy, to ANI.


The Ayodhya issue has been pending in the Supreme Court since 2010, after the Allahabad HC divided the land equally between 'Ram Lalla', the Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Wakf Board.


Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to an early hearing on a bunch of petitions relating to the dispute over ownership of 2.7 acres of Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi land. It posted the case to August 11.The court's remark had come on a plea of BJP leader Subramanian Swamy who sought urgent listing and hearing of the matter.


Appeals challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict on the disputed land will be heard by a three-judge bench.
 
If the land had belonged to the Shia wakf board, then why did the Allahabad HC grant rights to the Sunni Wakf board ?
 
Shia are not a party in babri masjid so it's irrelevant what they say .
Bloody boot lickers and back steppers.
 
Shia are not a party in babri masjid so it's irrelevant what they say .
Bloody boot lickers and back steppers.

The Shia Waqf Board, in its affidavit, has pointed out that it had the title of the disputed land till 1946 and claimed that the British government wrongly transferred the title to Sunni Waqf Board in 1946.

http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/ind...nd-in-ayodhya-shia-waqf-board-tells-sc-395393

The land belongs to Shia Waqf board.

Anyway Babur do not belong to India, he is an outsider.
 
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...gress-blames-bjp-rss/articleshow/59970007.cms


HIGHLIGHTS
  • The Board further told the SC that it was the only one entitled to negotiate an amicable settlement of the dispute
  • 'This intervention by the Shia Waqf board is god sent, said Rajya Sabha member Subramanian Swamy
59969982.jpg

NEW DELHI: Uttar Pradesh's Shia Central Waqf Board told the Supreme Court (SC) On Tuesday it is okay with a mosque built in a Muslim dominated area that is at a reasonable distance from the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi site.

In an affidavit, the Board further said the SC that the Babri Masjid was its property and therefore it was the only one entitled to negotiate an amicable settlement of the dispute

The 30-page affidavit assumes significance as it has been filed within few days of the apex court agreeing to fast track the hearing on a batch of appeals challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict on the land dispute in the case, said PTI. The Shia Board is one of the parties in the pending appeals in the apex court.

The Board also sought time from the SC to set up a committee to explore an amicable settlement of the Ayodhya dispute.


"According to me, this intervention by the Shia Waqf board is god sent," said Rajya Sabha member Subramanian Swamy, to ANI.

The Ayodhya issue has been pending in the Supreme Court since 2010, after the Allahabad HC divided the land equally between 'Ram Lalla', the Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Wakf Board.


Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to an early hearing on a bunch of petitions relating to the dispute over ownership of 2.7 acres of Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi land. It posted the case to August 11.The court's remark had come on a plea of BJP leader Subramanian Swamy who sought urgent listing and hearing of the matter.


Appeals challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict on the disputed land will be heard by a three-judge bench.
Yeah. Any free land is okay. Their headache.
 
It would have been build long time ago but Secularism came in the way. Now we will get it done.

Secularism did not come in the way.

Secularism is still there and believes that a Mandir, and only a Mandir, should be there.

If I am honest about what came in the way, I will again be given tickets for Iran, and/or Eden Gardens.

Cheers, Doc
 
The Shia Waqf Board, in its affidavit, has pointed out that it had the title of the disputed land till 1946 and claimed that the British government wrongly transferred the title to Sunni Waqf Board in 1946.

http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/ind...nd-in-ayodhya-shia-waqf-board-tells-sc-395393

The land belongs to Shia Waqf board.

Anyway Babur do not belong to India, he is an outsider.

This means that the land now belongs to Suni waqf board due to law of adverse possession. The statute of limitations on it is 14 years.

Unless the shia wakf board can show that they have fought against this wrong transfer of title and that the case is still in court.


Of course, this also means that the land now belongs to the make shift temple since that has been on that land since 1949.
 
Secularism did not come in the way.

Secularism is still there and believes that a Mandir, and only a Mandir, should be there.

If I am honest about what came in the way, I will again be given tickets for Iran, and/or Eden Gardens.

Cheers, Doc
It was Rajiv Gandhi who played the Ram mandir issue after he messed up things in the shah bano case.
 
Shia waqf board has no say in the matter, destroy the temple build the mosque

Indian Muslims are you that beghairat that you are going to allow a mosque be desecrated and your "secular" state and courts justify it

Stand up for yourselves pansies!
 
This means that the land now belongs to Suni waqf board due to law of adverse possession. The statute of limitations on it is 14 years.

Unless the shia wakf board can show that they have fought against this wrong transfer of title and that the case is still in court.


Of course, this also means that the land now belongs to the make shift temple since that has been on that land since 1949.
Law of adverse position do not work in this case , if challenged in the courts.
 
Shia waqf board has no say in the matter, destroy the temple build the mosque

Indian Muslims are you that beghairat that you are going to allow a mosque be desecrated and your "secular" state and courts justify it

Stand up for yourselves pansies!

Bull crap.

Muzzies can pray at home. A mosque is not necessary. Their courts have decided.

#TakingIndiaBack
 

Back
Top Bottom