In the Gyanvapi case, the petition of the Muslim side will be heard first. Varanasi Court has given this decision after a hearing. Now the matter will be heard in Varanasi district court on May 26. Order 7/11 will be heard on May 26. Along with this, the court has sought objection from both the parties on the survey in a week.
The judge gave a new date after hearing both sides. Let us tell you whether the Special Places of Worship Act 1991 is applicable in this case or not. On May 26, application 35C of the Muslim side will be heard whether it is maintainable or not.
Vishnu Shankar Jain, counsel for the Hindu side on the Gyanvapi Masjid case, said that the hearing on the petition of the Muslim side under 7/11 CPC regarding the rejection of the trial will be held on May 26. The court has asked both parties to file an objection to the commission's report and submit the report within a week. The lawyer for the plaintiff said that our demand was fulfilled. Videography copy will be given to both parties.
Earlier, the hearing of the Supreme Court's order in the Gyanvapi campus dispute was held in Varanasi's district judge's court on Monday. Both the sides put forth their demands but the court, while not giving any decision, adjourned the hearing till today.
Primarily the district judge's court will decide whether to first hear the suit for the maintainability of the petition or to hear the objections raised in the Shringar Gauri case first. On Monday, both sides kept their points in the court of District Judge Dr. Ajay Krishna Vishwes for about 45 minutes.
Anjuman Intejamiya said that first in compliance with the order of the Supreme Court, it should be decided whether the case of Rakhi Singh Vs State of UP is maintainable or not. Said that after the filing of the suit, the maintainability was challenged, but the lower court, ignoring it, ordered the survey commission.
Now the first decision has to be taken on whether the Special Places of Worship Act 1991 is applicable or not. Advocate Vishnu Jain, appearing for the plaintiff, said that the videos and photos of the commission proceedings are evidence related to this case. First, their copy should be given, then after objection from both sides, it should be decided whether the suit is maintainable or not.
He said that the Special Place of Worship Act does not apply here. DGC Civil Mahendra Prasad Pandey also said that worship is being done before and after 1991 also. In this case, the Special Place of Worship Act does not apply. Earlier, there was a ban on the entry of anyone other than the plaintiff-defendant's parties and their advocates in the courtroom. Due to this only 23 people went to court.
Cryptocurrency: Strong boom in the crypto market after stock market, strong rise in bitcoin
Bitcoin Jumps High: The brakes have been put on the continuous decline in bitcoin. Bitcoin is tra
Sri Lankan great spinner Muttiah Muralitharan says current Indian coach Rahul Dravid is included
At least 276 Covid-19 cases were reported in India during the last 24 hours, taking the total num
Before the start of the T20 World Cup, the Indian team will play its only practice match on June
Once again strong tremors of earthquake were felt in Turkey. Its intensity was measured at 6.3 on
Bharat Jodo Yatra: Rahul Gandhi stayed at farmer's house, cut fodder with machine
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi reached Dausa on Thursday during his Bharat Jodo Yatra in Dausa, Raj
The monsoon that reached Delhi after soaking many states has made a strong impact. The first and
The Israel-Hamas conflict has been going on for more than two months. While on the one hand, Pale
These days the issue of work shifts is hot in Bollywood corridors. After becoming a mother, Deepi
Britain's big action against Russia freezes assets worth 18 billion pounds
The British government has taken a big step on Thursday regarding Russia, which is waging war aga
