BREAKING| 5-judge bench to pronounce Ayodhya verdict tomorrow
Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ, S.A. Bobde, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ will
mediation
Ayodhya verdict| CJI meets UP Chief Secretary, DGP to take stock of law and order situation in the State
Supreme Court: Ahead of the impending verdict in the Ayodhya case, Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi held a meeting on Friday
P&H HC | No illegality in quashing criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute if parties have entered into a settlement
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Hari Pal Verma, J. allowed the petition filed for quashing of FIR under Section 482 of Code
Ayodhya hearing| 40-days hearing comes to an end; Verdict reserved
Supreme Court: The 40-days long Ayodhya title dispute hearing has finally come to an end today. The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi,
Ayodhya Hearing| This matter will be over by 5pm today; enough is enough: CJI
Supreme Court: On the 40th day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said that the daily
Ayodhya Hearing| SC grants police protection to U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board’s chairman
Supreme Court: Considering the threat perceptions of Zufar Ahmad Faruqui, Chairman, U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, the Court has dire ted the
Ayodhya hearing| We don’t want any mediation: Ram Lalla Virajman’s counsel
Supreme Court: Ram Lalla Virajman, one of the parties in the Ayodhya title dispute case, on Monday told the Supreme Court that
Ayodhya hearing| Won’t hear the matter for even a single extra day after October 18: SC to all counsels
Supreme Court: Indicating that judgment in Ayodhya dispute case is likely to be delivered before CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s retirement in November, the
Ayodhya hearing| SC to hear the matter for an extra hour in order to conclude the hearing by Oct 18
Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ has
Ayodhya hearing| SC asks parties to come up with tentative timeline for conclusion of arguments
Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ has
Ayodhya hearing| SC slams Nirmohi Akhara for opposing Ram Lalla’s plea; Says you ‘stand’ or ‘fall’ together
Supreme Court: When Nirmohi Akhara submitted that being the ‘shebait’ (devotee), only its lawsuit was maintainable and the case filed by deity
Ayodhya Hearing| There was a temple in the inner courtyard of the disputed site: Nirmohi Akhara
Supreme Court: Senior counsel appearing for Nirmohi Akhara, one of the parties in the Ayodhya title dispute case, told the Supreme Court
Ayodhya hearing| Babri Masjid was built either on the ruins of Ram Mandir or by pulling it down: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Supreme Court: On the 8th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, Ram Lalla’s counsel, Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan, told the 5-judge
Ayodhya hearing| Excavations show that a massive Lord Ram temple existed at the disputed site: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Supreme Court: On the 7th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, Ram Lalla’s counsel, Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan, told the 5-judge bench
Ayodhya hearing| Court shouldn’t go beyond rationality of belief of Ayodhya being Lord Ram’s birthplace: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Supreme Court: On Day 6 of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, Senior advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan, appearing for deity Ram Lalla, told the
Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site
Supreme Court: On the 5th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, arguments on whether a temple existed at the disputed site in
Ayodhya hearing| SC rejects Sr Adv Rajeev Dhavan’s plea against 5-days a week hearing
Supreme Court: On the fourth day of hearing in the Ayodhya title dispute case, the counsel appearing for one of the Muslim
Ayodhya hearing|Both Hindus & Muslims have always called the disputed site a ‘Janmasthana’: Ram Lalla’s counsel
Supreme Court: Senior Advocate K Parasaran, appearing for the Ram Lalla, one of the parties in title dispute case, has told the Supreme
Ayodhya hearing| SC seeks evidence of possession of Ramjanmabhumi from Nirmohi Akhara
Supreme Court: The Court has sought evidence of possession of Ramjanmabhumi from Nirmohi Akhara, after it contended that it had lost the
Ayodhya hearing| No Muslim has entered the disputed land since 1934: Nirmohi Akhara
Supreme Court: On Day 1 of the day-to-day hearing in the Ayodhya land dispute, Nirmohi Akhara, told the 5-judge bench of Ranjan