What tilted the scales in favour of the Hindu side in the Ayodhya case was the Supreme Court’s willingness to consider “exclusive possession” by the Hindus of just one part of the disputed site as valid grounds for awarding a title over the entire site. Its decision was not based on the case made by the Muslim side for “adverse possession” as reported by sections of the media.
In this piece, we explain both these aspects as well as the flaws in the court’s reasoning.
First, a look at what the court said about exclusive possession.
Partial possession ...
Read the full text Scroll