We will appeal to SC, say Muslim leaders
All India Muslim Personal Law Board
Professor Mohammad Sulaiman, senior member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, who has been part of the litigation, told rediff.com, "We are obviously disappointed. The case has only been dismissed on technical grounds on account of the adverse possession. However we are happy that the court has nowhere ruled that Muslims had demolished a temple and built a mosque.
"It is not the final verdict and we can move the Supreme Court. The high court has given three months time to negotiate on the issue of the outer courtyard and also ordered maintaining of status quo for three months until the parties go in for appeal," he said.
"I cannot give you a time frame as to when the appeal will be filed. We need to prepare well and build a good case to put up before the highest court of the land. We hope that the Supreme Court will take into consideration the tradition of this particular case and not decide on the issue of adverse possession. We will be extremely disappointed if that court does the same," he said.
Click on NEXT to read further...
'We are ready for an amicable solution of the issue'
Ram Janmbhoomi Trust
Sri Ram Janmbhoomi Trust Chairman Nritya Gopal Das on Thursday welcomed the Allahabad High Court's verdict on the Ayodhya title suit, but said they would challenge the decision to provide one third of the disputed land to Sunni Central Waqf Board, in the Supreme Court.
"We welcome the verdict, but will challenge the decision to give one third land to the Sunni Central Waqf Board in the apex court," Das said reacting to the verdict on the issue.
He said he was not able to understand why one-third land was given to the board.
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Thursday ruled by a majority verdict that the disputed land in Ayodhya be divided equally into three parts among Hindus and Muslims and that the place where the makeshift temple of Lord Ram exists belongs to Hindus.Das said the Hindus should not get over-excited, as the verdict will finally be challenged in the Supreme Court.
"We are ready for an amicable solution of the issue," he, however, said.
'The verdict should not be seen as anybody's victory or defeat'
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh said the verdict on the Ayodhya title suit should not been seen as anybody's victory or defeat and sought people's support for construction of a Ram temple.
"The judgment has paved the way for the construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya. The judgement is not a win or loss for anybody. We invite everybody, including Muslims, to help build the temple," Sarsangchalak Mohan Bhagwat told media persons.
"The court verdict should not be seen as anybody's victory or defeat," he reiterated.
Bhagwat also said the joy and happiness over the verdict should find expression in a 'controlled and peaceful manner' within the limits of law and constitution.
"Uncalled for provocation must be avoided," he said adding, the movement for a Ram temple was 'not a reactionary one nor it is against any particular community.'
'We are not going to the Supreme Court'
Vishwa Hindu Parishad
Dr Pravin Togadia, international general secretary of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, welcomed the unanimous decision of the three judge bench.
"The judgment said that at the 110-90 feet place where the idols of Lord Ram, Sita and Laxman are worshipped by the Nirmohi Akhara and Hindu devotees would be allowed to continue worship Ram Lalla and there was a mandir existed there before a masjid was erected there," a beaming Togadia told media persons.
Contrary to expectations, the VHP has decided against any kind of celebrations. A drummer who had turned up at the place was quickly asked to leave the place.
"Our plea is that Hindu devotees should pray in temples and thank Ram Lalla. We have also got Sita Rasoi and Chabutra places, according to the court verdict. We are not going to the Supreme Court but if other parties go then we shall be there to defend our case before the honourable court," he asserted.
Ayodhya verdict: Parties and petitioners react
Bharatiya Janata Party & Congress
The Bharatiya Janata Party, which spearheaded the Ramjanmabhumi movement, termed it as a "positive" development while Congress said no one should treat it as a victory or defeat.
BJP spokesperson Prakash Javedekar said the judgement was a "positive" development. The BJP top brass met in the evening to decide on the future course of action on the issue.
Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, a known Hindutva hardliner, said the road for the construction of a magnificent Ram temple at Ayodhya has been paved. He, however, maintained at the same time that there was "no room for frenzy".
Hailing the judgment, Congress General Secretary Janardhan Dwivedi said his party has held that the controversy should either be solved through talks or the verdict of the court should be accepted.
"The court has given the verdict. We should all welcome the judgement," Dwivedi said.
Ayodhya verdict: Parties and petitioners react
BSP Supremo and UP Chief Minister Mayawati threw the ball in the Centre's court over the implementation of the verdict as well ensuring peace and harmony in the state alleging that it had not provided enough paramilitary forces for security.
CPI(M), however, reacted cautiously saying the judgement required to be fully studied as there may be questions on the nature of the verdict and maintained that recourse to Supreme Court should be the only way to resolve the matter.
"This judgement requires to be fully studied. There may be questions on the nature of the verdict," the CPI(M) Polit Bureau said in a statement.
'We are going to the Supreme Court'
"We are not satisfied with the judgment and have appealed to our community to maintain peace and calm since we are confident of winning the case in the Supreme Court," Dr S Q R Ilyas, convenor of the Babri Masjid Action Committee, told rediff.com from New Delhi.
Dr Ilyas said the judiciary has tried an unnecessary balancing act when the issue should have been resolved. "Justice has just not been done where we are concerned," he said.
"Although I need to go into detail and study the verdict, what I see prima facie is what the bench has discussed. The judges have said that there was no temple there before and they admit that idols were kept in the year 1949. This is what confuses me. When the court has made these factors clear, why give a ruling against us? I do not know the logic behind this," he said.
"We have not lost hope and we are going to the Supreme Court. The basic issue is that till 1949, Muslims prayed in the mosque over there and until then there was not a single claim to the land. At that point of time the Hindus were praying in a Chabutra in the outer courtyard. How has the judiciary not reacted to this fact in its order?"
"There is no question of sharing and I appeal to all members of my community to maintain calm and tell them nothing has been lost as yet," he added.