The lawsuit filed by deity 'Ram Lalla' through a next friend in 1989 was nothing but a "socio-political vehicle" of 'Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas' to construct a new temple on the place of Babri masjid, Muslim parties told the Supreme Court Friday.
'Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas' is a trust set up by 'Vishwa Hindu Parishad' (VHP) on December 18, 1985 for construction of grand Ram temple at the disputed site.
A five judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, hearing the politically sensitive case on 28th day, was told by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Muslim parties, that the 1989 lawsuit was not filed to claim the structure, but to construct a new temple.
"The suit number 5 (filed by next friend Deoki Nandan Agrawal on behalf of deity Ram Lalla Virajman and the janambhoomi was the socio-political vehicle for Nyas to construct the temple. This is what I believe," Dhavan told the bench which also comprised Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chnadrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer.
The former high court judge, acting as the next friend to the deity and the 'janmbhoomi', had filed the lawsuit in 1989 in the court to stake claim over the disputed land.
Dhavan alleged larger design behind filing of the lawsuit on behalf of the deity and said 'Nyas' was the trust created by VHP in 1985 and the case was filed almost four years after to remove hurdles in building the temple.
When lawsuit was pending, VHP led the nation-wide stir for the Ram temple at the site and started collecting 'shila' (special bricks) from people across the country and later the structure was demolished.
At the outset, the bench asked Dhavan, appearing for Sunni Waqf Board and others including original litigant M Siddiq, to show pictures of inscriptions, written in Arabic, on the pulpit of the structure.
"Show us the photographs of inscriptions on the pulpit," Justice Bobde asked.
Referring to one of the pictures taken in 1990, Dhavan said on the top of the arch of the inner central 'mehrab', the word 'Allah' was written in Arabic.
Dhavan said, "Babur came to India due to only one reason that he had lost Samarkand" and the mosque was built in 1528.
He reiterated his submissions and said the 'Janmbhoomi' has been made a party to the 1989 lawsuit with the sole purpose to remove all the obstacles coming in the way of construction of the temple.
He repeated his submissions that said if the apex court treated the land as the deity and a party to the case, all other persons would lose their legal rights.
"No title can be claimed, if the janmbhoomi is considered the deity and a juristic person. No adverse possession can be claimed. The land acquisition law will not apply," he said.
"The real reason for the Janmasthan argument was to canvass two regimes, idol regime and bhoomi regime," he said adding that if the land is held to be the juristic person, then it can neither be divided nor be acquired.
The bench wrapped up day's hearing around 12.30 pm and would recommence it on September 23.
On Thursday, Dhavan lost his cool and had told a curious Justice Bhushan that he was seeing "some kind of aggression" in his tone. However, he quickly regretted his remarks.
The Allahabad High Court, in its judgment of 2010 on four civil lawsuits, had partitioned the 2.77-acre disputed land equally among Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla. Fourteen appeals have been filed in the Supreme Court against the verdict.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)