The Mathura District Court admitted the appeal filed against the order of Civil Judge, Mathura, dismissing the suit for removal of Masjid Idgah, allegedly built on the land of Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi.
Notices were issued to Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board, Trust Masjid Idgah, Srikrishna Janamsthan Trust and Sri Krishna Janam Bhoomi Seva Sangh in Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim case.
Case Background of Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim case
The Appellants have submitted in the civil appeal that the Civil Judge was wrong in dismissing their suit inasmuch as they are worshippers of Lord Shri Krishna and they have the right to assert their right to religion guaranteed by Article 25 of the Constitution to have Darshan and perform puja at the actual birth of place of Lord Krishna which is at present beneath the structure illegally raised by Muslims.
“It is the right and duty of the worshippers to make every endeavour to bring back the lost property of the deity and to take every step for the safety and proper management of the temple and the deities property,“ it has been submitted in the Civil Appeal.
Notably, the appeal avers that the Civil judge (in its 30th September order) mentioned that compromise had been entered into between Trust Masjid Idgah and Krishna Janamasthan Trust, whereas the Plaintiffs had clearly stated in the plaint that the compromise was made between Shri Krishna Janmsthan Sewa Sangh and Trust Masjid Idgah; and Shri Krishna Janmasthan Trust was not a party to the compromise and it had not filed the suit.
Therefore, it has also been alleged in the civil appeal that the impugned judgment is stated to be based upon the wrong assumption of fact and suffering from non-application of mind.
Civil Judge’s Order delivered on 30th September in Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim case
The Civil Court, while dismissing the suit, had observed that such type of suits is instituted through Shebait, however, the court had noted that the present suit had not been instituted through Shebait.
Importantly, the Court had further opined that if each and every devotee is allowed to institute such suits, it would Jeopardize the Judicial and Social System.
The Court had remarked that to allow the plaintiffs to institute the suit, on the basis of they being the devotees, isn’t Justified and is legally untenable and the institution of the suit by the devotees is not allowed in the eyes of Law.
Noting the aforesaid, the Court had come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs in the present matter did not have the right to sue and so there was no base to register the case and hence it deserved dismissal.
Arguments in the Present Appeal for Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim case
Disputing this reasoning of the Court, the Appellants in their appeal for Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim have submitted that a suit cannot be rejected on the ground that several others may also approach the court.
They pointed out that the Court below “failed to take notice of the provision of the order 1 rule 8 CPC and that the court in the appropriate case has the power to treat any suit as representative suit when the interest of numerous persons are involved.” (emphasis supplied)
Significantly, the Civil Court had also remarked that the Appellants for Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim herein do not have a ‘Right to sue’.
Challenging this finding, in the appeal it has been submitted,
“The question regarding the right to sue cannot be decided in a summary manner. At the time of admission of suit the Court cannot decide the suit suo moto the question of the right to sue. Even the court below did not call upon the counsel for the plaintiffs to address on the point of locus standi.“
The matter for Krishna Janam Bhoomi Claim has been postponed to 19th November.