In the ongoing Shahi Idgah Mosque-Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Temple dispute, plaintiff’s advocate Mahendra Pratap Singh on Thursday filed his objections to the mosque committee’s Order VII Rule 11 application challenging the maintainability of his suit.
Mr. Singh argued that the Places of Worship Act cannot be applied in this case, as suggested by a district court earlier this year while directing that a similar suit in the dispute should be admitted afresh.
The Shahi Idgah Mosque management committee is currently facing at least six similar suits, including Mr. Singh’s, in Mathura, claiming ownership of the land on which the mosque is built on behalf of the Krishna temple.
In Thursday’s hearing, Mr. Singh cited the district court’s order in the suit of advocate Ranjana Agnihotri, who was the first to initiate a legal suit in the dispute, that the Places of Worship Act, 1991 might not apply to this case.
“In both the cases, the defendant is the same, the disputed property is the same and the grounds for the suits are the same. So, the district court’s decision in Ms. Agnihotri’s suit should apply to our case as well. But the mosque committee is insisting on making the same arguments in its Order VII Rule 11 application. Along with this, we also submitted revenue records, corporation records and other documents to prove our claim over the disputed land,” Mr. Singh told The Hindu.
Advocate Tanveer Ahmed, secretary of the mosque management committee and its lawyer, said that despite hearings in this suit going on for months now, the plaintiff had filed objections to the maintainability challenge only now.
“This seems to be an attempt to stall proceedings. We were given a copy of their objections only 20 minutes before the hearing started today [on Thursday]. Now, we have sought time to file our reply to their objections,” Mr. Ahmed said, adding the suit had been put up for the next hearing on July 11.
Apart from Mr. Singh’s suit, other similar suits in the dispute have been listed for hearing on July 15.
