The Hindu side had also said that the property belonged to the deity Katra Keshav Dev for more than 1,000 years and the birthplace of Lord Krishna was demolished in the 16th century and a "chabutra" (platform) was constructed for the construction of the Idgah. was constructed. I left.
Advocate Taslima Aziz Ahmadi, who appeared on behalf of the Muslim side through video conferencing on Wednesday, again told the court that the matter is beyond limited scope. According to him, both parties had entered into an "agreement" on October 12, 1968 and the said agreement was confirmed in a civil suit judgment in 1974.
Ahmadi said the statute of limitations to challenge a settlement is three years, but the current lawsuit was filed in 2020 and thus is barred by the statute of limitations.
He further said that after the removal of the structure of Shahi Eidgah, a case has been filed for the possession of the temple as well as its renovation. Ahmadi said that the prayers in the case show that the structure of the Eidgah is still there and is in the possession of the mosque management committee.
The Hindu side first argued that the case was maintainable and the non-maintainable petition could be decided only after leading evidence. Question has been raised on the hearing of the case in the application filed by the Muslim side under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It said the case could be dismissed.
The counsel for the Hindu side had further submitted that the deities were not a party to the agreement claimed in 1968 nor to the court judgment passed in 1974. The Hindu side also argued that the deities were not a party to the settlement of the claim. between the two parties in 1968 or a court decree passed in 1974.
The counsel for the Hindu side had also said that the claimed agreement was entered into by Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, which had no authority to enter into any such agreement.
Advocate Taslima Aziz Ahmadi, who appeared on behalf of the Muslim side through video conferencing on Wednesday, again told the court that the matter is beyond limited scope. According to him, both parties had entered into an "agreement" on October 12, 1968 and the said agreement was confirmed in a civil suit judgment in 1974.
Ahmadi said the statute of limitations to challenge a settlement is three years, but the current lawsuit was filed in 2020 and thus is barred by the statute of limitations.
He further said that after the removal of the structure of Shahi Eidgah, a case has been filed for the possession of the temple as well as its renovation. Ahmadi said that the prayers in the case show that the structure of the Eidgah is still there and is in the possession of the mosque management committee.
The Hindu side first argued that the case was maintainable and the non-maintainable petition could be decided only after leading evidence. Question has been raised on the hearing of the case in the application filed by the Muslim side under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It said the case could be dismissed.
The counsel for the Hindu side had further submitted that the deities were not a party to the agreement claimed in 1968 nor to the court judgment passed in 1974. The Hindu side also argued that the deities were not a party to the settlement of the claim. between the two parties in 1968 or a court decree passed in 1974.
The counsel for the Hindu side had also said that the claimed agreement was entered into by Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, which had no authority to enter into any such agreement.
