Ayodhya Agreement

The fact that a right is lost does not mean that it was frivolous. A frivolous speaker takes liberties with facts. The Bank`s order shows that it does not dispute the facts cited in the petitions, but that it has only problems with so-called petitioners` motivations. The reasons are secondary if one agrees on the discharge requested. In imagining the absence of motives, the Supreme Court may have unwittingly refused relief where it was most important: the preservation of the precious heritage. But it is hard to believe that the preservation of these monuments and artifacts — with which even the SG agreed — could water down the verdict. If this were the case, the centre should not have hesitated to oppose conservation. But it wasn`t the other. At the heart of the new complaint filed last week is the assertion that the Seva Sangh had no location to reach an agreement with the administration of the mosque. It was the Shree Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust and the lord of the world who owned the country, said the 1967 complaint, and the 1967 complaint was not filed on behalf of the trust. Mediation is a confidential process in which a neutral third party helps find an acceptable solution.

In the context of judicial mediation, such an agreement is enforceable as a court decree. In that case, the court stressed that «mediation and the opinions expressed by one of the parties, including erudite mediators, will be treated confidentially.» The Hindu and Muslim parties were represented before the Tribunal by more than a dozen parties. In the absence of an agreement between all, no «settlement» was possible and the last roundtables took place without the agreement of all parties involved. In addition, the infiltration of the proposal is contrary to the Tribunal`s injunction to seek confidentiality. It has done little and has led to a lot of criticism. It is questionable whether these are measures designed to push the Muslim side into a colony. Hours before the Supreme Court ended the 40-day hearing on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title trial, the Bank of five justices` Ayodhya conciliation committee presented its final report, in which it described what has been described as a settlement agreement, people familiar with development said Wednesday. However, following the complaint filed last week, the High Court reiterated in its 1993 appeal that Seva Sansthan and the Janmabhoomi Trust were different entities. The Seva Sansthan was sanitized by the 15 directors of the Janmabhoomi Trust, as well as others.