HINDUS WOULD GET THE ENTIRE DISPUTED 2.77 ACRES IN AYODHYA. POSSESSION OF LAND TO REMAIN WITH CENTRE. MUSLIMS WILL GET ALTERNATE FIVE ACRES OF LAND EITHER IN THE SURPLUS 67 ACRES ACQUIRED IN AND AROUND THE DISPUTED STRUCTURE BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OR ANY OTHER "PROMINENT" PLACE. A TRUST WILL BE FORMED IN 3 MONTHS TO BUILD A TEMPLE ON THE DISPUTED LAND.

 

M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs  Vs  Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, (2019) 11 SC CK 0030

Hindus would get the entire disputed 2.77 acres in Ayodhya. Possession of land to remain with Centre. Muslims will get alternate five acres of land either in the surplus 67 acres acquired in and around the disputed structure by the central government or any other "prominent" place. A trust will be formed in 3 months to build a temple on the disputed land.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

COURTKUTCHEHRY LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Image
  COURTKUTCHEHRY LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Sl. No. TITLE & CITATION RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS 1. Yashwant Sinha & Ors. Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation Through Its Director & Anr, (2019) 11 SC CK 0041 PERCEPTION OF INDIVIDUALS CANNOT BE THE BASIS OF A FISHING AND ROVING ENQUIRY. THE PROCESSES HAVE BEEN BROADLY FOLLOWED. THE NEED FOR THE AIRCRAFT IS NOT IN DOUBT, AND THE QUALITY OF THE AIRCRAFT IS NOT IN QUESTION. 2. Kantaru Rajeevaru Vs Indian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary And Ors., (2019) 11 SC CK 0040 A LARGER BENCH WILL DECIDE WHETHER TRADITIONAL PRACTICES CAN PREVENT ENTRY OF WOMEN AT RELIGIOUS PLACES. TILL SUCH TIME ENTRY OF WOMEN IS PERMITTED AS PREVIOUS VERDICT ON SEPTEMBER 28TH, 2018 WAS NOT OVERTURNED. 3. Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court Of India  Vs ...
Read more

SC UPHELD THAT FOREIGN LAW FIRMS/COMPANIES OR FOREIGN LAWYERS CANNOT PRACTICE PROFESSION OF LAW IN INDIA EITHER IN THE LITIGATION OR IN NONLITIGATION SIDE. HOWEVER, IT WAS CLARIFIED THAT THERE WAS NO BAR FOR THE FOREIGN LAW FIRMS OR FOREIGN LAWYERS TO VISIT INDIA ON A “FLY IN AND FLY OUT” BASIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING LEGAL ADVICE.

Image
  Bar Council Of India  Vs  A.K. Balaji And Ors , (2018) 03 SC CK 0093 SC upheld that foreign law firms/companies or foreign lawyers cannot practice profession of law in India either in the litigation or in nonlitigation side. However, it was clarified that there was no bar for the foreign law firms or foreign lawyers to visit India on a “fly in and fly out” basis for the purpose of giving legal advice.
Read more