1

S.S JAIN SUBODH LAW COLLEGE

MANSAROVAR, JAIPUR

PAPER NO. –2.8

MEDIATION, CONCILIATION AND
ARBITRATION LL.B. II Year

SESSION-2023-24

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Ms. Anushka Ajmera Vipan Singh
(Assistant prof.)

Page
2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It gives me immense pleasure in presenting this project report on Paper No.

2.8MEDIATION, CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION. The success of
this project is a result of sheer hard work and determination put in by me with the
help of my subject guide and takes the opportunity to express my gratitude to
Anushka Ajmera (Asst.Prof.) of S.S.Jain Subodh Law College, Mansarovar,
Jaipur, who played a significant role in my project. I hereby, take this opportunity
to add a special note of thanks for the PrincipalProf.(Dr.)Gaurav Kataria
constant encouragement at every step.
I also feel heartiest sense of obligation to my library staff members and seniors
who helped me in collection of data and resource material and also in its
processing as well as in drafting manuscript. The project is dedicated to all those
people, who helped me while doing this project.

Date:27.02.2024 Submitted by
Vipan Singh

Page
3

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Vipan Singhof LL.B. IIYear has carried out thisProject
Report titledMEDIATION, CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATIONundermy
supervision for the partial fulfilment of LL.B. Degree offered by S.S.Jain Subodh
Law College, Mansarovar, Jaipur, during the academic year 2022-23 is an
original work carried out by the student under my supervision. The student has
completed the research work in stipulated time and according to the matter
prescribed for the purpose.

Date: 27.02.2024
Name of Supervisor: Anushka
Ajmera Signature of Supervisor:
(Asst. Prof.)

Page
4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No. Particulars Page No.

Part A 1. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION SYSTEM
2. MEDIATION AND THE 5-14
MEDIATION PROCESS
Part B 1. A REPORT ON "THE MOCK
MEDIATION SESSION"
CONDUCTED BY THE
STUDENT AS MEDIATOR
2. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS 15- 18
BETWEEN THE PARTIES
ACCORDING TO THE
SCENARIOS ALLOTTED IN THE
SESSION

PART C CASE ANALYSIS

19 - 20

Page
5

Part A
Alternative Dispute resolution system
Definition

The process by which disputes between the parties are settled or brought to an amicabe result
without the intervention of judicial institution and without any trail is known as Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR).

 ADR offers to resolve all type of matters including civil, commercial, industrial and
family etc., where people are not being able to start any type of negotiation and
reach the settlement.
 Generally, ADR uses neutral third party who helps the parties to communicate,
discuss the differences and resolve the dispute.
 It is a method which enables individuals and group to maintain co-operation, social
order and provides opportunity to reduce hostility.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms

 ADR is a mechanism of dispute resolution that is non adversarial, i.e. working

together co-operatively to reach the best resolution for everyone.
 ADR can be instrumental in reducing the burden of litigation on courts,
while delivering a well-rounded and satisfying experience for the parties
involved.
 It provides the opportunity to "expand the pie" through creative,
collaborative bargaining, and fulfill the interests driving their demands.

Types of ADR
Arbitration

 The dispute is submitted to an arbitral tribunal which makes a decision (an "award")
on the dispute that is mostly binding on the parties.
 It is less formal than a trial, and the rules of evidence are often relaxed.
 Generally, there is no right to appeal an arbitrator's decision.
 Except for some interim measures, there is very little scope for judicial intervention
in the arbitration process.
6

Conciliation

A non-binding procedure in which an impartial third party, the conciliator, assists the parties to
a dispute in reaching a mutually satisfactory agreed settlement of the dispute.

 Conciliation is a less formal form of arbitration.

 The parties are free to accept or reject the recommendations of the conciliator.
 However, if both parties accept the settlement document drawn by the conciliator,
it shall be final and binding on both.

Mediation

 In mediation, an impartial person called a "Mediator" helps the parties try to reach
a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute.
 The mediator does not decide the dispute but helps the parties communicate so they
can try to settle the dispute themselves.
 Mediation leaves control of the outcome with the parties.

Negotiation

 A non-binding procedure in which discussions between the parties are initiated

without the intervention of any third party with the object of arriving at a negotiated
settlement to the dispute.
 It is the most common method of Alternative Dispute Resolution.
 Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit organizations, government branches,
legal proceedings, among nations and in personal situations such as marriage,
divorce, parenting, and everyday life.

Lok Adalat

 An interesting feature of the Indian legal system is the existence of voluntary

agencies called Lok Adalats (Peoples' Courts).
 The Legal Services Authorities Act was passed in 1987 to encourage out-of-court
settlements, and
 the new Arbitration and Conciliation Act was enacted in 1996.
 Lok Adalat or "People's Court" comprises an informal setting which facilitates
negotiations in the presence of a judicial officer wherein cases are dispensed
without
 7

undue emphasis on legal technicalities.

Page
8

 The order of the Lok-Adalat is final and shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil
court and shall be binding on the parties to the dispute.
 The order of the Lok-Adalat is not appealable in a court of law

Importance of ADR In India

 To deal with the situation of pendency of cases in courts of India, ADR plays
a significant role in India by its diverse techniques.
 Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism provides scientifically developed
techniques to Indian judiciary which helps in reducing the burden on the courts.
 ADR provides various modes of settlement including, arbitration, conciliation,
mediation, negotiation and lok Adalat. Here, negotiation means self-counseling
between the parties to resolve their dispute but it doesn’t have any statutory
recognition in India.
 ADR is also founded on such fundamental rights, article 14 and 21 which deals
with equality before law and right to life and personal liberty respectively.
 ADR’s motive is to provide social-economic and political justice and maintain integrity
in the society enshrined in the preamble.
 ADR also strive to achieve equal justice and free legal aid provided under Article 39-A
relating to Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP).
 ADR has proven successful in clearing the backlog of cases in various levels of
the judiciary –
 Lok Adalats alone have disposed more than 50 lakh cases every year on average in
the last three years.
 But there seems to be a lack of awareness about the availability of these mechanisms.

The National and State Legal Services Authorities should disseminate more information
regarding these, so they become the first option explored by potential litigants.

Page
9

Important Provisions Related To ADR

 Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 provides that opportunity to the people,
if it appears to court there exist elements of settlement outside the court then court
formulate the terms of the possible settlement and refer the same for: Arbitration,
Conciliation, Mediation or Lok Adalat.
 The Acts which deals with Alternative Dispute Resolution are
i. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
and, ii.The Legal Services Authority Act,
1987

Advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution

 Less Time Consuming: people resolve their dispute in short period as compared
to courts
 Cost effective method: it saves lot of money if one undergoes in litigation process.
 It is free from technicalities of courts; here informal ways are applied in
resolving dispute.
 People are free to express themselves without any fear of court of law. They can reveal
the true facts without disclosing it to any court.
 Efficient way: there are always chances of restoring relationship back as parties
discuss their issues together on the same platform.
 It prevents further conflict and maintains good relationship between the parties.
 It preserves the best interest of the parties.

Page
1
0

MEDIATION AND THE MEDIATION PROCESS

The meaning of mediation is an informal process for helping people who have a dispute to
sort it out for themselves without going to court and it is a process in which the parties to a
dispute, with the assistance of a neutral third party (the mediator), identify the disputed issues,
consider alternatives and endeavour to rear an agreement.

The mediator has no advisory or determinative role in regard to the content of the dispute or
the outcome of its resolution, but may advise on or determine the process of mediation
whereby resolution is attempted. Mediation can either be private or mandated by court. In
both types, the initial stage or pre-mediation phase, may involve mediator informing parties
about the mediation process. This may also involve mediator dealing with queries of
disputants, making them understand about the particular models and approaches, checking the
suitability of mediation, and helping parties reach the stage of readiness to commit themselves
to signing up to the process."

Why Mediation is Advantageous Over Other Modes of Dispute Resolution

Mediation has long been practiced a method of dispute resolution whether in an organised
capacity or unorganised capacity. Owing to the reason behind this perpetuity are the following
reasons. However, it is important to note that just like any other procedure for dispute
resolution, there is no assurances of specific outcomes.

1. Confidentiality:
When one looks at the parties and cases generally associated with mediations, it is
observed that usually these are conflicts between married couples over divorce or
custody matters, disputes arising between family members, business partners,
neighbours, corporations and unions, etc. These cases often have matters which both
parties would prefer being unknown to public ears. In the mediation process, the
environment itself plays a huge role in achieving an amicable outcome. Parties and
a mediator converge to mutually talk out the conflict and negotiate a solution which
is equitable for the parties involved. Any matter discussed between parties and the
mediator are not disclosed to any member of the public or press unless both parties
expressly request for the same.

Page
11

Convenience:
Mediation as a method of dispute resolution by its very nature one which seeks to
constructively adjudicate the matter. It is above all, a voluntary process which can be set in a
nominal amount of time due to the absence of requirements such as filing court documents in
order to get a date. This is of particular importance, once again in conjunction with the
particular types of cases opting for this method of dispute resolution, time is of essence.
Furthermore, as a technique of dispute resolution, mediation represents a system without any
procedural complications and no compliance requirement with regards to rules of evidence.

2. Collaborative:
Mediation truly encapsulates one of the most important concepts of law, resolution.
Since the parties are in a position where they do not seek to punish the other rather
come to a middle ground in order to pacify matters furthermore. This results in an
adjudication which is much more suitable and agreeable than other forms of dispute
resolution. This flexibility is a major contributor to the popularity of mediation in the
first place.

From the concept of three Cs, we begin to look into the more practical aspects of mediation.
The very first thing that has to be understood is that mediation is often portrayed as the best
form for dispute resolution. However, it is imperative to understand, that statement doesn't stay
true for all applications. For conflicts between parties where the concern is a civil suit and there
has been no claim for damages or none of the parties are seeking punitive damages, mediation
is slowly but surely turning out to be one of the most favourable options.

This is due in parts thanks to the immense use of mediation across all stages in the corporate
domain. As a matter of fact, Business Mediation is the most rapidly growing approach for
resolving business disputes. The swiftness of adjudication coupled with the positive outcome is
a massive attractor for business executives.

Page
12

Steps in the Mediation Process

Whenever any case is to be sent to mediation, the following steps are followed-

Step 1: Convening the Mediation Process

The convening of the mediation is often the most difficult and challenging part of the
mediation process. It involves a varied range of procedures-

 Reference to ADR by the Court

The court is required to direct the parties to opt for any of the five modes of alternative dispute
resolution and to refer the case for Arbitration, Conciliation, Judicial Settlement, Lok Adalat or
mediation under Section 89 and Order X Rule 1A of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The Court must consider the option exercised by the parties and the suitability of the particular
case for the option chosen. The judge making the reference, known as the referral judge, is
required to acquaint himself with the facts and the nature of the dispute, and objectively assess
the suitability of ADR.

This appropriate stage for making the reference in civil cases is after the completion of
pleadings and before framing the issues, while in cases pertaining to family law, the
appropriate time for making the reference would be immediately after service of notice on the
respondent and before the filing of objections/written statements by the respondent.

Even if the court did not refer the cases to ADR at these times, nothing prevents it from
referring to it at a later stage.

 Preparation for Mediation

The referral judge then has the crucial job of bringing the parties together and motivating them
to resolve their disputes through mediation. This involves finding the reasons for any
disinclination on behalf of the parties to enter into mediation, along with explaining the
concept, process and advantages of mediation.

While the consent of parties is required for mediation, the court can also apply external
pressure to induce the parties to enter the mediation, to the extent of ordering or forcing them
to do so.

 Referral Order

Page
13

A referral order issued by the referral judge initiates the process of mediation and s the
foundation of a court-referred mediation. An ideal referral order contains details like name of
the referral judge, case number, name of the parties, date and year of institution of the case,
stage of trial, nature of the dispute, the statutory provision under which the reference is made,
next date of hearing before the referral court, whether the parties have consented for mediation,
name of the institution/mediator to whom the case is referred for mediation, the date and time
for the parties to report before the institution/ mediator, the time limit for completing the
mediation, quantum of fee/remuneration if payable and contact address and telephone numbers
of the parties and their advocates.

Step 2: Initiation of the Mediation Process

The mediator has to ensure that the parties and their counsels are present at the commencement
of the mediation process.

Introduction and Opening Statement

Introduction

 The mediator gives an introduction with his qualifications, establishes his neutrality and
reposes faith in the mediation process.

 The mediator requests the parties to introduce themselves, attempts to develop a rapport
with them and gain their confidence and trust.

 The motive is to create a constructive environment conducive to negotiations and

motivate the parties for an amicable resolution of disputes.

 The mediator establishes control over the mediation process.

 There is no standard set of rules that have to be followed, making the mediation
procedure flexible.

Opening Statements

 The mediator’s opening statement is intended to explain to the parties-

o the concepts, processes and stages of mediation,

o the role of the mediator, advocates and parties and

o the advantages and ground rules of mediation.

 The mediator confirms that the parties have understood the process and gives them the
opportunity to get any doubts clarified.

Page
14

 Statements are also sought from the negotiators. The parties articulate their positions,
enabling the other party to understand what they want.

 This is followed by a restatement of the problem by the mediator where an attempt is

made to incorporate the differing perspectives.

Step 3: Setting the Agenda

 Setting the agenda is an important duty imparted on the mediator in order to shed
clarity on the mediation proceedings and remove vagueness.

 It involves setting down the order in which negotiation is to proceed and gives the
parties a standard using which they can individually evaluate the progress of the
negotiations.

 The mediator may mention the time and venues for the negotiation sessions, along with
the issues before the parties, to be discussed sequentially.

Step 4: Facilitation of Negotiation and Generation of Options

Joint Session

The purpose of the joint session is to gather information.

 The mediator provides an opportunity for the parties to hear and understand each
other’s perspectives, relationships and feelings.

 The petitioner is allowed to explain their case in their own words, followed by the
presentation of the case by their counsel and the statement of the legal issues.
Similarly, the defendant is allowed to explain their case, followed by the presentation
of the case and statement of the legal issues involved by the defendant’s counsel.

 The mediator attempts to understand the facts, issues, obstacles and possibilities and
ensures that each participant feels heard.

 The mediator encourages communication and asks questions to elicit information.

 At the completion of the joint session, the mediator may also suggest meeting each
party with their counsel separately.

Separate Sessions

 The separate sessions are meant for the mediator to understand the dispute at a deeper
level.

Page
 15

 It provides the parties with a forum to further vent their feelings and disclose
confidential information they do not wish to share with the other parties.

 It helps the mediator to understand the underlying interests of the parties, the positions
taken by them and the reasons for these positions, identify areas of dispute,
differential priorities and common interests, and to shift the parties to a mood of
finding mutually-acceptable solutions.

 The mediator is supposed to reaffirm confidentiality, gather further information and

challenge and test the perceptions and conclusions of the parties in order to open their
minds to different possibilities. This is to be done by asking effective questions and
helping the parties understand the strengths and weaknesses of their cases.

 The mediator offers options which he feels bests satisfies the underlying interests of the
parties.

Step 5: Reaching a Settlement

 By helping parties to understand the reality of their situation and give up rigid
positions, the mediator creates creative options for settlement.

 The mediator can conduct as many separate sessions as necessary and may even
conduct sessions with groups on the same side with diverging interests.

 The parties negotiate through the mediator until a solution mutually acceptable to all
the parties involved. The mediator directs the parties to a solution which he believes
will satisfy the underlying interests of the parties.

 In case negotiations fail, the case is sent back to the referral court.

Step 6: Closing

 There is no fixed procedure that must be followed.

 Once the terms of the settlement have been agreed to, the parties are reassembled.

 The mediator orally confirms the terms the terms of the settlement as a procedural
requirement.

 The parties, with the mediator’s aid, write down the terms of the settlement and sign the
agreement.

 The settlement has the binding nature of a contract and is enforceable in a court of law.

 In his closing comment, the mediator thanks the parties for their help and participation
in the mediation process.
Page
16

In case no settlement is reached between the parties, the case is returned to the referral court
stating failure to settle. The proceedings of the mediation are kept confidential and cannot be
revealed even to the court.

Page
17

PART B
MOCK MEDIATION

» A Report on the Mediation session

Date – 23/02/2024

Mediator – vipan singh , yash sharma

Parties – { sidharth agarwal, Farah Bano } – { yash laghwani, Grima Singhani }

Dispute – Related to society’s building safety

»Facts of the case

• Mr. Fring, a real estate developer was looking for the site for commercial project.
• Mr. White lives in Albuquerque with his family in the Skyler Housing Society, and the
Persident of the society. He has been residing at Plot No.2 since past 3 decades. Plot No.1 is
an approved commercial land ( being facing on the main road ), as per the society layout.
• Mr. Fring has recently purchased the said Plot No.1, and is planning to
develop acommercial complex at the site.
• The layout plan of the project involves a multi-storey building having 10 floors and
a basement with built-up are of 10,000 square feet.
• Mr. Fring has received objection from Mr. White on behalf of the society. The society
has objected the said construction of the basement because the proposed construction
migh resultin some damage of the adjacent bunglows the building a basement of such
vast size neas the old houses might affect their structure.

Page
18

Stage: 1 – Mediator Opening Statement

The Mediation session was conducted by { vipan singh, yash sharma }us where firsall we
introduced ourselves as Mediator then and started with brief introduction on ADR
process and Mediation Mechanism as follow:

ʻʻ We are your Mediators { vipan singh, yash sharma } and we are here to resolve your
dispute through ADR process. ADR process is an alternative method to resolve claims and
contractual disputes. I am not judge here and the uktimate decision will be yours. It will
consume: less time, less expenses and fast solution while keeping your privacy confidential.ʼ

Stage: 2 – Disputanat Opening Statement

The parties introduced themselves.
• Party 1 – I am Mr. Fring, Recent Owner of Plot No. 2
• Party 2 – My name is Mr. White, President of the Society

• Rules – Then we cleared them about the rules of mediation process

:1 . There should be no interruption.

2 . There should be no use of abusive words.

3 . And the confidential details should be discucced in private session.

Stage: 3 – Joint Session

Where we encouraged the parties to start with their respective disputes.

Party 1 : I Mr. Fring a real estate developer has recently purchased the said Plot No.1 and
planning to develop a commercial complex at the site , for which I has taken a loan of 2
million from a private lender. The president of the society has issued a letter to me that the
basement you are constructing may pose a threat to the 10 storey building. I have purchased
this commercial land for business purpose, for which I have also taken a loan of Rs 2 Million
So I do not want to face any loss and will start construction work on this site.

Party 2 : I Mr. White being the President of the society, I want to explain to you through a
letter on behalf of the entire society that the construction of basement in 10000 square feet by
you may pose a threat to the building of the society.
Mediator : Please, do not interrupt in bwetween the conversation.

Page
19

Settlement Agreement

This Agreement made as of February 23, 2024between Mr.fringe (Party 1) of Albuquerque

and Mr White (party 2) of Albuquerque New Mexico city.

WHEREAS

A. The parties are engaged in dispute relating to mr. Fringe real estate developer was
looking for the site for commercial project and recently purchased said plot no. 1
and his planning to develop a commercial complex project at the site .Mr. White the
president of the said society had objected.
B. The parties have agreed to resolve the Dispute upon the terms and conditions of
this Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the

respective covenants and agreements of the partues herein contained, it is agreed by and
between the parties as follows

1) The parties hereto agree that the foregoing recitals are true and correct in
all material respects.
2) Mr.White,on behalf of the society, placed a condition on Mr. Fringe that he
should take responsibility for any future loss of life or property to the
society’s building and society’s people due to the basement constructed by
him.
3) Except as expressly set forth in paragraph 2 above, the parties hereto release
and forever discharge one another and their respectove successors and assigns
of and from all suits, actions, causes of action, damages, claims, and demands
whatsoever, which they had, now have or which they, their successors and
assigns or any of them hereafter can, shall or may have against one another
for any reason whatsoever, including but not limited to all actions, causes of
action, damages, claims, and demands arising out of the dispute.
4) Eac of the parties covenants and agrees that it will sign such further
documents and do perform or cause to be done and performed such further
and other acts and things that amy e necessary or desirable from time to time
in order to give full effect to this Agreement.

Page
20

5) This Agreement shall be binding upon and ensure to the benefit of the
parties and their respective successors and assigns.

Page
21

PART C

M. Siddiqui vs. Mahant Suresh Das, (2020) 1 SCC 1

FACTS
This case, which has one of the earliest beginnings in the background of the Indian judicial
system, has long captured the interest of the whole country. The Case centres upon the
religious sentiments of India’s two most populous sects and their dispute over a plot for
ownership in the historic town of Ayodhya. The Muslim community and the Hindu
community both asserted that the disputed area is where the Mughal Emperor Babur’s Babri
Masjid was constructed, and where Lord Ram was born. The Babri Masjid was constructed
in 1528, which is when the lawsuit began. The first community uprising was in the late
1850s.
The colonial administration constructed a wall to divide the inner from the outside courtyard
in order to order this. Mahant Das brought a civil lawsuit in 1885 to have a temple
constructed in the exterior courtyard. However, the court disallowed him from doing so
because it thought it would disturb the peace and order of the community. When the Hindu
community erected Lord Ram statues in the Central Dome in 1949, it lit a sectarian fire that
endured for many years. After both communities filed lawsuits, the Faizabad Civil Court
ordered the disputed territory to be sealed off in accordance with Section 145 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. The district court of the Faizabad Court, however, unlocked the gates
and let the Hindu community practise their faith in the region in 1986. This came to an end
when the Karsewaks destroyed the mosque at Babri on December 6, 1992. In 1989, the case
was moved from the Faizabad Civil Court into the Allahabad High Court. The inner
courtyard, the Ram Chabutra, and the Sita Rasoi were designated for the Lord, the Nirmohi
Akhara, while the remaining property was designated for the Sunni Board by the High Court.
Yet, neither of the parties were happy with the court’s ruling, and they each petitioned the
Supreme Court for appeals and special leave. The Ram Janam Bhoomi was allegedly built
after the Mughals demolished it during their conquest of India, in accordance with the Hindu
community. On the other side, the Muslims said that Mir Qasim, the General of Babur,
carried out Babur’s instructions and erected the mosque on a piece of undeveloped ground.
The Muslim community, on the other hand, did not contest Ram Janam Bhoomi’s reality.
They only asserted that there was no proprietary claim made by the Hindu community. The
lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Shebat, claims the Nirmohi Akhara. The individual who
oversees the Deity’s affairs and acts as the Deity’s personal servant is known as a Shebait.

Page
22

The principal defence put out by the Sunni Board was that prior to the placement of the
statues in 1949, there had been none deities in the region. They said that they frequently
prayed in the mosque up until 1949. They would benefit more since they have long-term
usage of the contested property. On the other side, the Hindu community said that Babur
demolished numerous temples, included the temple at Ayodhya, after he entered their
territory, now known as India. It was only reasonable to make up for past wrongs after
adopting a constitutional system of just governance because the Hindu community was
forced to endure the violence of their invasion. They said that the land’s title, which had been
in place since the eleventh century, was still in force today. Evidence was offered, including a
copy of the Faizabad Gazette from 1928. This gazette recognised Babur, the Mughal
emperor, for destroying the historic Ram Janam Bhoomi shrine. The mosque was built using
the Kasauti Pillar along with other remnants of the demolished temple. Even after it was
destroyed, devotees kept on praying to Lord Ram using a variety of symbols, including Sita
Rasoi. The court case brought on the Deity’s behalf was crucial since in order to speak for the
Lord himself instead of his disciples. Their interests would be more important to him than
Lord Ram’s.[2]

Page
23

ISSUES RAISED
(1) Whether the statute of limitations in India applied to the lawsuits filed by
Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Waqf Board, and the god himself?

(2) Could Ram Janma Bhoomi be accepted as a legal entity?

(3) Perhaps there was ever an ancient temple in the contested territory? If so, would
the Hindu community be eligible if so?

Page
24

Arguments
Appellants side
Before idols were covertly transported inside the Babri Masjid between December 22 and
23, 1949, no idols were found on the property of the mosque. The proclamation rejected the
idea of an Asthana or a ruling deity.

Up to December 22nd and December 16th, 1949, respectively, the mosque’s grounds
hosted both the regular prayers and the Friday prayers.

The Mughal monarchs had previously funded the maintenance and operation of the masjid,
and the British administration carried on that tradition.

The disputed location in issue relies on the Hindu temple of Janmasthan, and it was situated
in the courtyard while the Muslims’ namaz was offered inside the boundaries of the mosque.

The challenged location has been a mosque for communal prayer for a long time, elevating
the location to a Waqf. The area that was in dispute served as a place of prayer since namaz
was offered there from the mosque’s construction in 1528 till its desecration in December
1949.

Page
25

Arguments

Respondents side

The atrocities done by the Mughals are now responsible due to the introduction of the Indian
Constitution, and they require redress. Thousands of temples, including the one at the
location, were demolished during Babur’s invasion of India. Hindus were not permitted to
exercise their rights since invaders-controlled India’s land.

The legal name of the saints from the 12th century AD remains enforceable legally now since a god’s
property is undeniable.

No legitimate Waqf has ever existed or could have existed. It has been stated that Hindus
continued to possess the place, despite intermittent intrusion by members of the Islamic
religion.

The Kasauti pillars and other remnants of the destroyed temple were used to build a mosque,
according to the 1928 version of the Faizabad Gazetteer.The god was not a participant to the
prior actions, and suit number 5 was filed because of worry that the primary parties’
personal interests would be upheld in the present suits at the expense of the deity of Lord
Rama.

Islam forbids the construction of mosques on the remains of previous sacred buildings.
Because of this, the Babri Masjid can’t be regarded as a mosque.

Page
26

Judgment:
The Supreme Court of India, on November 9, 2019, delivered its unanimous verdict in the M
Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v Mahant Suresh Das & Ors case. The court gave its ruling in favor of the
Hindu parties and granted them the disputed land while providing an alternative plot of land
to the Sunni Central Waqf Board for building a mosque. The court held that the underlying
structure below the demolished Babri Masjid was not Islamic in nature and that the mosque
was built on top of the ruins of a temple. The court further held that the Muslim side had
failed to establish continuous and exclusive possession of the disputed land. The court stated
that the Hindu parties had established their right to worship at the disputed site and that the
Archaeological Survey of India’s report confirmed the presence of a temple at the site.

The court also held that the government’s acquisition of the land in 1993 was not illegal. The
court ordered the formation of a trust, called the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra, to
oversee the construction of a temple at the disputed site. The trust was to have 15 members,
including one member from the Nirmohi Akhara, which was granted the right to be a part of
the trust without any voting rights.

The Sunni Central Waqf Board was granted an alternative plot of land of 5 acres in Ayodhya
for the construction of a mosque. The court directed the central government to provide the
necessary land to the Board.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court of India, in its unanimous verdict, granted the disputed
land to the Hindu parties for the construction of a temple, while providing an alternative plot
of land to the Sunni Central Waqf Board for the construction of a mosque. The judgment
marked the end of a long-standing legal dispute over the ownership of the disputed site in
Ayodhya.

Page
27

CONCLUSION

There comes a time when reconciliation and resolution outweigh the desire to eliminate
injustice. Apparently, the Supreme Court has chosen the direction that best promotes social
unity by allowing a temple to come up at the disputed site in Ayodhya through a government-
mandated fund.

The court asked for reservation of a five-acre plot elsewhere in Ayodhya that could be used
for a modern mosque to replace Muslim rights parties fired for unconstitutionally
demolishing the century-old Babri Masjid. Clearly, there is more political reconciliation,
moral compensation and less judgment to protect their religious rights.

With a divided political climate, the ultimate prize remains a source of concern for everyone
for whom the solution lies in more than maintaining stability. Still, they agreed, the most
welcome issue in the five-judge court’s 1,045-page decision. Because it sends the message
that the judges fought with one eye to ensure a legal burial for a long dispute that started as a
small dispute, developed into a political point of contention and was a festering body-politic
wound for years. The fact that the case is effectively closed would greatly help all citizens
who value justice.

Page