New Delhi: The Hindu side on Monday (December 9) told the Supreme Court that an appeal filed by the Muslim side before the apex court against the single bench of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the Muslim side plea challenging the maintainability of 15 cases filed by the Hindu side related to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura was not maintainable at this stage.
The counsel appearing for the Hindu side told a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dsanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar that the an intra-court appeal in the High Court should have been filed and urged the bench to dismiss the appeal of the Muslim side.
What did the Hindu side submit before the apex court?
Advocate Barun Sinha, who appeared for the Hindu side, while referring to the Allahabad High Court rules, submitted, “In view of Chapter 8 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, a special appeal before the division bench of the high court would be maintainable” and added while urging the bench to dismiss the Muslim side appeal, “An appeal in the Supreme Court was not “maintainable against the order of a single judge bench of the High Court and an intra-court appeal in the High Court should have been filed.”
The hearing into the matter would resume post the winter break.
Prima facie felt that an intra-court appeal would lie, CJI Khanna said during the last hearing
CJI Khanna, during the last hearing into the matter, said that he prima facie felt that an intra-court appeal would lie against the August 1 single judge bench order of the High Court.
The top court had earlier asked the Muslim side to apprise it whether the appeal against the order of the single bench dismissing its plea challenging the maintainability of 15 suits filed by the Hindu side lie before the division bench.
What did the High Court say?
The single bench of the High Court in its August 1 order rejected the submissions of the Muslim side that the plea filed by the Hindu side was barred under the Places of Worship Act, Wakf Act, Limitation Act and Specific Relief Act. The single bench had said that the suits filed by the Hindu side “do not appear to be barred by any provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995; the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991; the Specific Relief Act, 1963; the Limitation Act, 1963 and Order XIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908”.
