well dude
i m a practicing lawyer in the same Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court which has delivered this verdict.
for your knowledge
1) Sunni waqf board is a government entity
therefore it comes under the definition of state under article 12 of indian constition therefore being a state it cannot take a side of a particular religion or group.it is only or the purpose of maintaining waqf properties. and its head in every district is district magistrate.
it was also a legal point in this title suit.
2) the most important reason why the suits of Waqf board and Nirmohi Akhara were dismissed by the court is that these both suits were barred by Indian Limitation Act which provides a period of Limitation for difrent types of suits, appeals and other legal proceedings. its a legal ground.
3) i know that none of you have read the 8,200 pages judgement and i have also not gone through it but i have read its 248 pages briefing and judges have relied on the report of Archaeological Survey of India which is 100% scientific and it was prepared in the presence of the representatives of both parties. This report clearly shows with pictures that the disputed structure of the so called Babri Masjid was built on the pillars of Black Stone which have images and pictures of devtas and kalash(chota sa ghada) and other hindu signs.
4) further my dear friends it further pertinent to mention here that as per Islamic law its mandatory of every masjid that it must have Minars but i hope that all of u have seen the images of Babari masjid and there were no minars in it.
5) its is not disputed that there was a structure which was used by Hindus for worship there(i m not saying Ram janambhumi) and later it was demolished by Mir Baki who was Governor of Babar and He had built a structure there.therefore it further proves that it was nor the private land of MIr baki or Babar neither it was bought by them but it was a disputed land and as per islamic laws a masjid must be built on a private land which must be owned by that person and it must not be disputed. therefore it was even against islam. further it is also important to tell you that this disputed structure was surrounded by hindu worshiping places and the only way to enter in that structure was thorough those ancient hindu places. this also proves that there was a structure which was used by hindus and worshiped by them as a ram janamsthan but later a mosque was built on that place without minars which was totally against islam
6) hindus are not opposing a mosque. even hindus have asked Muslims to build a big mosque on other place and for your knowledge there is a separate fund or musjid in fund raised by hindus for Mandir but Muslims have denied it. there was nothing so much important in a structure which was unislamic except this that it was built by babar therefore it may be replaced by a beautiful mosque which must be according to islam on other place because it can be changed but place o ram janambhumi cant be changed.
7) i also think in these 18-20 years indian public has became so much mature than that periond.
8) in this judgement Hon'ble justice S U Khan has mentions parts of hindu books and Hon'ble Justice Dharamveer sharma has mentioned some parts of kuran, hadits and preaching of prophet mohamad.
9) i have Seen an Interview of Justice Dharam Veer Sharma on aaj tak. he was asked by a reporter that he must have done great research on kuran then he replied him that kuran is a great book and none can do research on kuran. it is book which is like an order for every muslim from Allah but yes i have studied Kuran and gone with the preaching of Mohamad Sahab and also Hadits for delivering this justice.
i hope that my this post has solved some confusion in this forum