Implications of the verdict

[saarangam]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

India?s Rich History: Myth of Rich Past Exposed | India First-Hand

lDear Ramanujan
A very good article.Thanks.

 

[RKB]

The Ayodhya verdict is a big mistake and will set a wrong precedence to all the title deed cases, if Supreme Court does not correct it at the earliest. What will happen if the Supreme Court Upholds this verdict?

Anyone will be emboldened to dispute the title of any site without any concrete evidence and Courts can do nothing then partitioning the land to all the disputants even if it has dismissed all the petitions. In Ayodhya too, if you and I also have petitioned on some grounds the High Court would have allotted us a share even after dismissing our petition!

What will happen if Mosleums disputed the Kapaleeshwarar Temple site? In fact there is abundant proof that Hindus have taken the burian grounds of Mosleums for this temple. If the matter goes before the Court, our MUKA will also implead himself as party by a petition. Then that also will be divided in to three at the minimum.

There are several disputes over temple and mosque properties pending in the Courts of India. None of them have assumed high profile as this Ayodhya. If Ayodyya's verdict is accpted, it will only help Courts to settle conveniently all these disputes by quoting Ayodhya as precedence. The political parties are not opening their mouth now for all of them are seeing big opportunity in this verdict. They will happily do this and relieve properties from Temples for profiting through awarding it to Corporates / MNCs. The religious fanatics (as per the politicians) who oppose them will be termed as Second Generation Maoists by these politicians!

I do not get as to how people get wild idea of putting Gandhi / Ambethkar etc memorial in disputed place. Today the number of Ambethkar's statue will be more than the number of the ubiquitous Ganesh Mandirs. Following of Ambethkar or Periyar have long become religious in their own right. To top it is the foolish thinking of dispute as a necessity again on foolish thinking that India do not have land for all.

In olden days Forest lands have been indiscriminately allocated for conversion to agricultural land, temple land etc by the whims and fancies of the rulers to fill his coffers. Later the Socialists felt it as necessary to award the agricultural lands for Industries. The thing started as Public Sector is now deteriorated as MNCs and MNCs necessarily are paying huge money to politicians and bureaucrats to get lands allocated of their choice. These reformist in the last decade awarded prime agricultural lands to Private Colleges and Universities. Now the bulk of temple lands are going to be made available to them at their disposal by this verdict. That is why the experts say this verdict as political.

 

[R. Ramanujan]

HELLO Mrrcscwc
u SOUND LIKE AN IMMATRE BOY.STOP CALLING ME BY NAMES. UNDERSTAND. KEEP UR ENGLISH TERMS HIRED FROM THE BRITISHERS WITH U. U HAVE NO RITE TO DISRESPECT PPL LIKE THIS. WATS MEANT BY RABBLE ROUSER. I NEVER CALLED U BY ANY NAMES. OR DISRESPECTED U. IF U DONT LIKE MY POSTS OR THREADS PLS PUT ME IN UR IGNORE LIST. THAT WAY MY POSTS WOULD BE NOT BE VISIBLE TO U. THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC FORUM my frnd I WILL POST WHATEVER I think is relevant as per my thinking.
if u carefully go through my post im supporting u and not negating u.
u r free to reply in a without indulging in ugly name calling.
AND AS FAR AS MY POST IS CONCERNED IF U APPLY A BIT OF REASONING AND LOGIC THEN IT WILL CERTAINLY MAKE SOME SENSe WITH DUE RESPECT DONT CALL BY NAMES. I REPEAT WE MIGHT DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER BUT RESPECT MUST BE THERE. there r bound to be diff of opinion and it must be respected and if not respected must be ignored. NANDRIGAL nanbe(thanks frnd)

 

[R. Ramanujan]

RKB sir well made point. faith should not be the guiding factor in deciding criminal cases. it will surely set wrong precedent for years 2 come.

 

[RKB]

Mr.Ramanujam,

With this verdict it is not necessary for one to be barbaric to demolish the temple structure in dispute. Just ensure the Court admits a case with the available evidences. The Court will deliver a verdict splitting the property and will put government / Administration in a fix. It will make news for about one or two decades. After that people will get used to it.

Even the present day tirumala tirupati devasthanam was built on ruins of jain and buddhist temples

Thirumala Venkateswara Temple: From Buddhism to Hinduism | India First-Hand

Now lets us hyphothitically assume in our wildest imagination that they come back and demolish the structure and put a statue of buddha in the garbha graha. spreading a belief that a old buddhist monestry was there and it goes to court and they do 50:50+give the garbha graha to buddhist then how would vaishnava brahmins feel.

its very simple. just putting ourselves into their shoes.

A very similar case to this is the hagia sophia(Hagia Sophia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
view of the Ultra Radical VHP http://vhp.org/category/faq/faqs/

 

[R. Ramanujan]

sri saarangam sir this site is full of knowledgeble articles i would personally request u to go through it. (India First-Hand)

the images would change every 5 to 8 seconds. just rite click on them and open them in a new tab. there r 4 to 5 articles that r very good.

romba nandrigal.

 

[R. Ramanujan]

rkb sir i was only giving a very remotely possible example. anyways wat u say does make sense. still it will take another 8 to 10 yrs in supreme court. till then it mite become irrelevant to ppl of that generation. one of the litigant is 90 odd yrs old. one of the judges has retired. but i doubt whether the supreme court will take faith into account or not. if it take faith into account then there mite be partition.

 

[RKB]

SC need not take that much time if some filed a Special Leave Petition citing the adverse possibilities from this verdict. In my opinion none of the present litigants will like to hasten things through SC for that will undermine the advantage to them. But somebody else will file SLP from a different case and that will trigger another debate. The best thing is to uphold the Judgement in British period and to make both 1949 and 1992 irrelevant. That will be the right thing to do legally. The property should go to Muslims and they should be quoted in History as people who have plundered the temple lands. This will be the right thing to do extra legally for a natural justice.

rkb sir i was only giving a very remotely possible example. anyways wat u say does make sense. still it will take another 8 to 10 yrs in supreme court. till then it mite become irrelevant to ppl of that generation. one of the litigant is 90 odd yrs old. one of the judges has retired. but i doubt whether the supreme court will take faith into account or not. if it take faith into account then there mite be partition.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Mr.Ramanujam,
I read the article cited in your posting.Perhaps you have not read further comments recorded below the very same article where many persons have
contested the contents.At best you can say the author has given his opinion/
verson without any verifiable proof.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Mr.RKB,
I do not know where you are residing.The perception of people residing in South
India and NORTH INDIA may be different as far as AYODHYA is concerned.
While Hindus in South India give importance to VARANASI, ALLAHABAD and GAYA people in North India goes to Varanasi and AYODHYA in their last phase of their lives as they consider these places as very sacred.
Land has not been apportioned to all Tom,Dick &Harry (pardon me for not using HINDU names) in this case but only to persons/organisation who are in actual possesion of this site from a long time.
Kapaleeswarar Temple is one temple among number of OLD temples in South INDIA and it cannot be compared with AYODHYA case.
I agree with you that POLITICIANS and small time LOCAL LEADERS always try to take over temple lands and make money.
Last year the EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF LORD RANGANATHASWAMY TEMPLE, SRIRANGAM sent notices to Residents staying close to the parikrama of the temple that the place belong to the temple and the residents have formed an association to contest the case.Large areas of LAND adjacent to TIRUSOOLAM SHIVA TEMPLE( very close to AIRPORT,CHENNAI) and belonging to the temple have been illegally occupied and many poor people who work as 'Domestic Help' in NANGANALLUR, MEENAMBAKKAM have constructed their tenements after paying heavy amounts to LOCAL LEADERS.
INDIA is a vast country and there could be any number of illegal occupation of Land.AYODHYA TEMPLE issue affects THE entire HINDU COMMUNITY.

 

[RKB]

IPC is same for both North and South India. IPC does should not be influenced by sentiments and faiths. I do not know as to how you say that 'who are in actual possession for long time' when the Court itself has failed in determining the possession. Last week there was a dispute in my neighborhood about a kid who has broken the flowerpot of a house in the street football. The resident of the house got hold of their football and the kids asked me to come to their rescue. The Gentleman who had taken the ball simply asked me to advise the kids to not to play football in the street endangering themselves and others property and instead go to playground (Maidhanam) for playing. The kids did not accepted this. They said that the person who has just moved in do not have any right to tell them for they were playing in the very street since they are toddlers. One of them said that his grandparents also used to play in the very same place long back when that place actually used to be a Maidhanam (He is right!) and questioned as to how the Maidhanam got converted in to residential area. You will think that this is not same as Ayodhya issue. But they are one and the same, except for public and media attention.Kids have right for merryment and their faith is also not questionable. If you are my neighbor, will you accept to conceding half of your property for kids?

Mr.RKB,
I do not know where you are residing.The perception of people residing in South
India and NORTH INDIA may be different as far as AYODHYA is concerned.
While Hindus in South India give importance to VARANASI, ALLAHABAD and GAYA people in North India goes to Varanasi and AYODHYA in their last phase of their lives as they consider these places as very sacred.
Land has not been apportioned to all Tom,Dick &Harry (pardon me for not using HINDU names) in this case but only to persons/organisation who are in actual possesion of this site from a long time.
Kapaleeswarar Temple is one temple among number of OLD temples in South INDIA and it cannot be compared with AYODHYA case.
I agree with you that POLITICIANS and small time LOCAL LEADERS always try to take over temple lands and make money.
Last year the EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF LORD RANGANATHASWAMY TEMPLE, SRIRANGAM sent notices to Residents staying close to the parikrama of the temple that the place belong to the temple and the residents have formed an association to contest the case.Large areas of LAND adjacent to TIRUSOOLAM SHIVA TEMPLE( very close to AIRPORT,CHENNAI) and belonging to the temple have been illegally occupied and many poor people who work as 'Domestic Help' in NANGANALLUR, MEENAMBAKKAM have constructed their tenements after paying heavy amounts to LOCAL LEADERS.
INDIA is a vast country and there could be any number of illegal occupation of Land.AYODHYA TEMPLE issue affects THE entire HINDU COMMUNITY.

 

[RKB]

I think I can take privilege of commenting on it by my age. I find these forums very interesting just because I could get opinions from others without any inhibition due to my age or other. Some have thought me has immature and some a boy /lady etc and all are free to assume as they like. So I get opinion from different perceptions.

Some are non believers and some others orthodox for ever. But non believers never are non believers for life time. They will change and will learn lesson from time. They should not be ignored or spoken harsh for their opinion. Kannadhasan changed and all of Stalin, Azagiri, Tamilarasu (and not Kanimozhi) are staunch believers in private life. Even Muka does not assume posture as Periyar for he has also learned belief in believes. On the otherside MGR also discouraged portraying himself as a believer in his movies. The posture one assumes is due to various reasons. If someone felt offended by a posting, good thing is not to pay back by the same coin.

HELLO Mrrcscwc
u SOUND LIKE AN IMMATRE BOY.STOP CALLING ME BY NAMES. UNDERSTAND. KEEP UR ENGLISH TERMS HIRED FROM THE BRITISHERS WITH U. U HAVE NO RITE TO DISRESPECT PPL LIKE THIS. WATS MEANT BY RABBLE ROUSER. I NEVER CALLED U BY ANY NAMES. OR DISRESPECTED U. IF U DONT LIKE MY POSTS OR THREADS PLS PUT ME IN UR IGNORE LIST. THAT WAY MY POSTS WOULD BE NOT BE VISIBLE TO U. THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC FORUM my frnd I WILL POST WHATEVER I think is relevant as per my thinking.
if u carefully go through my post im supporting u and not negating u.
u r free to reply in a without indulging in ugly name calling.
AND AS FAR AS MY POST IS CONCERNED IF U APPLY A BIT OF REASONING AND LOGIC THEN IT WILL CERTAINLY MAKE SOME SENSe WITH DUE RESPECT DONT CALL BY NAMES. I REPEAT WE MIGHT DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER BUT RESPECT MUST BE THERE. there r bound to be diff of opinion and it must be respected and if not respected must be ignored. NANDRIGAL nanbe(thanks frnd)

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Mr.RKB,
Sorry Sir. Your analogy does not hold good.The site in disputed area in AYODHYA is in actual possesion /control/management of the persons/organisations to whom it is allocated as per recent judgement of ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT.

 

[sangom]

The Ayodhya verdict is a big mistake and will set a wrong precedence to all the title deed cases, if Supreme Court does not correct it at the earliest. What will happen if the Supreme Court Upholds this verdict?

Anyone will be emboldened to dispute the title of any site without any concrete evidence and Courts can do nothing then partitioning the land to all the disputants even if it has dismissed all the petitions. In Ayodhya too, if you and I also have petitioned on some grounds the High Court would have allotted us a share even after dismissing our petition!

Shri RKB,

Thank you for pointing out another and very crucial facet of this Ayodhya judgment. Obviously you are from the legal profession, or, you have keen legal acumen. But I think your statement in the last sentence dulls the effectiveness of your argument, instead of enhancing it, especially the use of the words "some grounds", I feel.

What will happen if Mosleums disputed the Kapaleeshwarar Temple site? In fact there is abundant proof that Hindus have taken the burian grounds of Mosleums for this temple.

I am hearing such a news for the first time and am really surprised. Can you give/ cite some references for this; just so that I can get fuller info., not that I am suspecting your statement.

If the matter goes before the Court, our MUKA will also implead himself as party by a petition. Then that also will be divided in to three at the minimum.

Is there not a fundamental legal flaw in equating this imaginary scenario with the Ayodhya case which is more than 100 years old and the acquisition (even if by aggression) of the disputed Mandir by Babur goes back centuries in the past? If supposing Muslims come tomorrow with a claim, the dispute will go to the court immediately and the arguments will be that though something might have happened centuries ago in the past, there was no occupancy of the land under dispute by the Muslims for centuries and the Hindus have been using it as a Temple, hence the hindus get full rights. Don't you think so? Whereas in Ayodhya, the situation was different and both the communities were using it in known times.

There are several disputes over temple and mosque properties pending in the Courts of India. None of them have assumed high profile as this Ayodhya. If Ayodhya's verdict is accepted, it will only help Courts to settle conveniently all these disputes by quoting Ayodhya as precedence.

I agree subject to the caveat that if only these cases which you refer to are very similar to the Ayodhya case; if it is like the Mylapore scenario you picturised, I feel our courts will not follow the present verdict.

 

[R. Ramanujan]

sir krishnamurthy ji my main purpose is not to portray that tirupati. whether it was previously a jain or buddhist or hindu it doesnt matter to me. u should understand the purpose of me posting this post. it was only to emphasise on a particular viewpoint/stand(regarding babri mosque) which i wanted to highlite.

Tirumala tirupati devasthanam is not going to go anywhere. its goin to be there for time immemorial/eternity.

 

[nachi naga]

originally the whole bhu-lokam belonged to sanathana dharma,now a miniscule land is claimed as a country called bharath.what goes around comes around.muslims shud leave ayodhya or allow hindus to build lord shiva temple in mecca & medina.just as muslims are allowed to build mosque in 9/11 site in new york.even now the whole world is under sanathana dharma,but ppl have split it into many religions unknowingly.samastha loka sukhino bhavanthu.

 

[RKB]

You don't seem to understand legalities. It is in the adverse possession and if they have not gone to Court they will loose it by limitation.

Mr.RKB,
Sorry Sir. Your analogy does not hold good.The site in disputed area in AYODHYA is in actual possesion /control/management of the persons/organisations to whom it is allocated as per recent judgement of ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT.

 

[RKB]

Your arguments are logical. But the verdict defies our Constitutional logic. Only what unfolds will explain the reality. Let us wait and see.

Is there not a fundamental legal flaw in equating this imaginary scenario with the Ayodhya case which is more than 100 years old and the acquisition (even if by aggression) of the disputed Mandir by Babur goes back centuries in the past? If supposing Muslims come tomorrow with a claim, the dispute will go to the court immediately and the arguments will be that though something might have happened centuries ago in the past, there was no occupancy of the land under dispute by the Muslims for centuries and the Hindus have been using it as a Temple, hence the hindus get full rights. Don't you think so? Whereas in Ayodhya, the situation was different and both the communities were using it in known times.

 

[rcscwc]

You will realise one thing. Hindus never allowed the babri masjid to go unchallenged. But as long as muslim rule was there, there was no chance of any redessal.

It was only in 1885 that an opportunity came when the british applied uniform laws for such cases. The Faizabad Dist judge had agreed that the masjid was indeed built after demolishing a temple. But redressal was not given.

The mutawali of the masjid is not even a party to the suit. In fact all muslim parties are interlopers. Nirmohi Akara has been a disputant since 1722. Lord Ram Lalla Viraajman, a deity, too is a party. A deity is a minor and is represented by a Sakha, friend. The present Salha had recognition even before 1992. Technically, only a mutawali has a locus stadi, in his absence muslim case is un-represented. Muslims are themselves grumbling that their case was not put up properly.

SC would not hear fresh evidence. It would re-evalute the evidence produced in the HC. It is very much possible that the muslims might lose even the 1/3 portion HC gave them.

 

[suresoo]

While I appreciate the boldness of the verdict, I am not at all in agreement with it. That whole disputed place, in my opinion should have been taken out of the hands of both religions. A national museum perhaps could have been sanctioned, highlighting and chronicling the dispute and presenting the facts.

Land on either side of the area could have been sanctioned to both religions to build a temple or a mosque, with the knowledge that no one can pin point the exact ground zero for Sri Ram's birth location and nor can one establish the location had a functioning mosque in recent history. While I think that the Hindus have a better case in claiming it, I still think that it is unwise to turn back history.

This is a great solution for a Problem that does not exist! If there is need for building a national Museum i'm sure there is free available land in India to do the same.

The 3 litigants (who's views are only important in this court case) hold that land dear and want full possession to do whatever they want to do. For people with Grand Museum / Hospital idea, the question i have is, If you have acquired a land and hold it dear and some 3rd person comes in to claim the land, would you give away the land for common good?

In such cases, the court is the correct mediator and both parties/communities should have the maturity to accept it.
I was watching NDTV on the EVE of the verdict, The Host/Guests were saying how the Indian Judiciary is the Best and middle the line before the verdict. When the verdict went against their views they started blaming it as Panchayat Rule!!

IMO, this is a good verdict and should be used as the basis for any settlement.

thanks,

 

[R. Ramanujan]

well one thing i should like to add here that anyways it will take another 8 to 10 yrs for final verdict to come frm the supreme court. its not in the hands of anybody then why waste time thinking abt it. there r more imp issues facing us like unemployment,poverty,education,drug,female foeticide,maoism,honour killings,growing urban-rural divide etc etc. i know for a lot of ppl this issue evokes emotions. lets leave it in the hands of the judiciary. there has been no case like this in this world so complex and full of contradictions.
but one thing its very imp that those who use it for their political interest must be sidelined/isolated/ignored. they bank by creating these divisions among communities. vote bank politics u c.
pothu makkal must know whom to listen and whom not to. anyways i doesnt matter that much to young generation who have grown up in cities. they r much more mature and tolerant.
they should not let it affect inter community relations. and peace and tranquility is very imp. only then we can focus on other problems mentioned above. look at pak now. its almost bankrupt. they r tackling Taliban, baloch separatism, sectarianism, communal ism, floods, recession, excessive defense budget, radicalism, terrorism, red tap ism, corruption. they don't even have money to pay their babus salaries.trying for a loan u c. appealing to philanthropists and donors to give generously and they preach india on Kashmir.
what im trying to say(by mentioning pak) that if peace and tranquility is maintained in the nation then the rest of the problems r much more easier to tackle. i hope every community realises this basic fact. anyways we have to live together whether we like it or not. so should respect each other.
thanks.

 

[rcscwc]

It is too late to talk of a school, hospital. museum etc. That should have been brought before the HC. But such votaries have suddenly woken from the slumber only now.

It has become fashionable to say that today's youth does not care. That would be a dangerous assumption and ignoring too things. The full and final thinking is crystallised after some time. To asume that muslim youths do not care if there is a masjid is even riskier.

SC might take a few years, no doubt. But surely it can be requested to take up the case as expeditiously as deaths of a few criminals.

A few inevutables are there.

A temple will eventually come up.
More and more Hindus will now feel much more secure about a pilgrimage to Ayodhya and more and more will come there.
Congi is in a tricky position. It seems to a lose-lose scene with it. I expect immidiate outcome in Bihar.
BJP need not do anything further. It can claim to be vindicated about the temple stand.
Muslim votes will consolidate behind Mulayam, Laloo and Paswan. Congi would be loser. BJP might even gain if Hindu consolidation can be achieved even partially. Then Laloo might look like a Leauge Prasad.

 

[nachi naga]

Today we in our turn are claiming that proprietorship, but in four hundred or a thousand years perhaps someone else will come to claim the same. The land is here, and we come here and falsely claim ourselves to be proprietors of it. This philosophy of false proprietorship is not in line with Vedic injunctions. Śrī Īśopaniṣad states that “everything animate or inanimate that is within the universe is controlled and owned by the Lord (īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvaṁ).” The truth of this statement is factual, but under illusion we are thinking that we are the proprietors. In actuality God owns everything, and therefore He is called the richest.-guru srila prabhupada.

 

[Harini]

Just when Ramanujam is posting this message, another Rahmathlla from Pak is posting a message stating India is bankrupt with issues like Maoist, Babri etc. Problem of unemployment (Full employment is also bad for any economy!), poverty, education will remain even after 100 years and so there is no logic in asking public to forget temple-masjid issue citing these sort of problems. Bulk of the urban educated in India, very particularly in our community, get carried away by the media reports and are always trying to live the life portrayed in the media. They sacrifice their culture and community without any protest thinking that they are acting wise for the cause of 'casteless tomorrow', that is Utopian.

Judiciary does not takes issue by itself. It is the responsible public amongst us who take issues to Judiciary. Like it was said in another thread, if Brahmins find it necessary to demand reservation for themselve then they have to make it as an issue before Judiciary. But majority of the urban educated prefers very happy life (which they call a life of sacrifice and expect the rest of the world to emulate them for peace and tranquility to dawn automatically!!!) watching TV and taking news as it comes to them. They will not apply their mind on anything for action but they will apply their mind for everything for just posting messages.

well one thing i should like to add here that anyways it will take another 8 to 10 yrs for final verdict to come frm the supreme court. its not in the hands of anybody then why waste time thinking abt it. there r more imp issues facing us like unemployment,poverty,education etc etc. i know for a lot of ppl this issue evokes emotions. lets leave it in the hands of the judiciary. there has been no case like this in this world so complex and full of contradictions.
but one thing its very imp that those who use it for their political interest must be sidelined/isolated/ignored. they bank by creating these divisions among communities. vote bank politics u c.
pothu makkal must know whom to listen and whom not to. anyways i doesnt matter that much to young generation who have grown up in cities. they r much more mature and tolerant.
they should not let it affect inter community relations. and peace and tranquility is very imp. only then we can focus on other problems mentioned above. look at pak now. its almost bankrupt. they r tackling Taliban, baloch separatism, sectarianism, communal ism, floods, recession, excessive defense budget, radicalism, terrorism, red tap ism, corruption. they don't even have money to pay their babus salaries.trying for a loan u c. appealing to philanthropists and donors to give generously and they preach india on Kashmir.
what im trying to say(by mentioning pak) that if peace and tranquility is maintained in the nation then the rest of the problems r much more easier to tackle. i hope every community realises this basic fact. anyways we have to live together whether we like it or not. so should respect each other.
thanks.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri rcscwc Ji,

My response below in 'blue':

KRS, you are late by a few years. HC could have been petitioned to do what you wish, but was not petitioned.
Sir, I was not talking about the court. I was talking about the handling of this issue by the successive governments. Even with the current court decision, the judges could have arrived at a different legal decision, as it can not be proved beyond doubt about the exact location of Rama's birth.

Central govt had acquired all that property, but not for a public cause. Moreover it was not a party to the suit. The HC treated mostly as a title suit, AS ON 6 Dec 1992. It could not go beyond those parameters. So sooner we drop such cliches the better it is. It only helps to make the muddy waters muddier.
I notice, you use the word 'cliche' a lot to respond to other's postings. You are responding to my generalized posting with a narrow response about the court case. In what sense my posting is 'muddying' the waters? What 'waters' are you referring to?

Like it or not, Raja Ram Viraajman is a party to the suit and has been recognised as such, not by this bench but much earlier than 1992.Okay, so what?

It is better to reconcile to a few hard realities. Lord Rama Viraajman cannot be ousted even by the SC, not now. No Govt has any guts to do so. The appeals will mostly deal with two aspects:

Is partition justfied, given that the HC has accepted it as the janmbhumi?

Was all the evidence considered? Mind you, till today ASI report is confidential, but not NOW, as it is part of the evidence. Rest assured the report would mercilessly examined by independent scholars across the globe and plethora of conclusions would be drawn.

I am sorry sir, there is no evidence about the exact location of Lord Rama's birth. What could have be established is that the muslims could have destroyed a Ram Mandhir there and built a mosque over it. Even if this is established, current India belongs to everyone if there is no ownership documents. This is why I said that I do not agree with the court's decision.

Regards,
KRS