Krishna Janambhumi Dispute: Allahabad HC Stays Suit Pending In Mathura Court Seeking Removal Of Shahi Idgah Masjid
The Allahabad High Court has stayed proceedings pending before the Mathura court in a suit filed by the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust and other private parties seeking to remove the Shahi Idgah Masjid, allegedly built on the land of Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi in Mathura.The order was passed by the bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai while hearing a petition filed challenging the judgment and...
The Allahabad High Court has stayed proceedings pending before the Mathura court in a suit filed by the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust and other private parties seeking to remove the Shahi Idgah Masjid, allegedly built on the land of Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi in Mathura.
The order was passed by the bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai while hearing a petition filed challenging the judgment and order dated May 19, 2022, passed by the District Judge, Mathura wherein the Court had held that the suit to remove the Shahi Idgah Masjid, allegedly built on the land of Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi is maintainable.
It may be noted that in Civil Revision No. 02 of 2021, the Mathura Court allowed a revision plea by the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust and other private parties and overturned a civil court order dismissing their suit in September 2020.
Read more about the case here: Places Of Worship Act Not Applicable To 2020 Suit On Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Dispute: Mathura Court
Essentially, the High Court was hearing a plea filed under Article 227 of the Constitution Of India by the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board arguing that the abovementioned order of the Mathura Court was without jurisdiction in as much as the valuation of the revision was more than Rs.25,00,000/- and, therefore, the District Judge did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the revision.
In view of this, noting that the matter requires consideration, the Court issued the notice by registered post with acknowledgment due to respondents nos. 1 to 11 and sought their counter affidavit.
"List before the Registrar who shall fix any date for admission after counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been filed by the parties. The Registrar may, if necessary, grant further opportunities to the parties to file their affidavits but not more than two further opportunities shall be granted by the Registrar," the Court further noted as it stayed further proceedings before the trial court in Misc. Case No. 176 of 2020 in pursuance of the order passed by the District Judge, Mathura.
The background of the revision plea
Essentially, a suit had been filed in September 2020 on behalf of the deity Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman seeking the removal of the Shahi Eidgah (mosque), adjacent to the Shri Krishna temple complex in Mathura, and the transfer of 13.37-acre land to the deity.
The Petitioners/Revisionists Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman, Asthan Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi through Next Friend Ranjana Agnihotri further sought cancellation of a compromise decree of 1974 by saying that the agreement between Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan and Shahi Idgah Trust in the year 1973, on the basis of which an earlier suit filed in 1964 was compromised, was fraudulent.
It was stated that in the agreement concerned, the Sansthan had conceded the property of Deity/Trust in favour of Trust Masjid Idgah. In the 2020 suit, the plaintiffs had challenged that very agreement and compromise decree of 1974.
However, a civil court in Mathura (U.P) on September 30, 2020, refused to admit the suit and rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC on the ground that the Plaintiffs, being the devotees/worshippers of Lord Krishna, have no right to file the suit.
When that order was challenged in revision by the petitioners, the District & Sessions Judge Mathura, Rajeev Bharti in May 2022 allowed their plea and directed the Trial court to hear both the parties and to pass appropriate order.
In a significant observation, the Court had also observed that the provisions of The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 will have no application in this dispute.
The Court, while accepting the revision plea, said that since the agreement and the subsequent compromise decree had been challenged by the plaintiff, the Place of Worship Act will not apply in this case by virtue of section 4 (3)(b) of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.
Senior Advocate SFA Naqvi assisted by Counsels Punit Kumar Gupta and Poorva Agarwal appeared for the petitioner.
Case title - U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board v. Bhagwan Sri Krishna Virajman And 10 Others [MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5967 of 2022]
Click Here To Read/Download Order