Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah dispute: Allahabad high court adjourns hearing till April 4

After hearing both sides in the suit, Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman at Katra Keshav Dev Khewat and others, Justice Mayank Kumar Jain adjourned the hearing.

The Allahabad high court on Monday adjourned till April 4 the hearing on applications (under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code ) regarding the maintainability of a suit filed in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah dispute at Mathura.

The prayer in the suit shows that the structure of the masjid (mosque) is there and the management committee is in possession of the same, it was argued by the Muslim side. (HT FILE)

After hearing both sides in the suit, Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman at Katra Keshav Dev Khewat and others, Justice Mayank Kumar Jain adjourned the hearing.

Senior advocate Tasneem Ahmadi, the counsel for the Muslim side (UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and management committee of Shahi-Eidgah Masjid), appearing through video conferencing, concluded her arguments on the application for rejection of the plaint on Monday.

Her main argument was that the title suit is not maintainable as the same is barred by the provisions of the Waqf Act as well as the Places of Worship Act 1991, which prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on the August 15, 1947.

She also submitted before the court that the suit is barred by limitation. According to her, the parties had entered into a compromise on October 12, 1968 and the said compromise was confirmed in a civil suit decided in 1974. The limitation to challenge a compromise is three years, but the suit was filed in 2020 and therefore, the present suit is barred by limitation, she said.

It was further submitted that suit has been filed for possession after removal of the structure of the Shahi Eidgah Masjid, as well as for restoration of a temple, and for permanent injunction.

The prayer in the suit shows that the structure of the masjid (mosque) is there and the management committee is in possession of the same, it was argued by the Muslim side.

“In this way, a question/dispute has been raised on Waqf property and thus provisions of Waqf Act will apply and as such, it is the Waqf Tribunal, which has the jurisdiction to hear the matter and not a civil court like the present one,” Ahmadi said.

Subsequently, the counsel for the Hindu plaintiff sought a short time to file an objection to the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC challenging the maintainability of the suit filed by Hindu side. The court granted time for this.

During the hearing, senior advocate Manish Goyal assisted the court as amicus curiae.