Ayodhya case: Know the parties that have staked claims to the disputed site

From Nirmohi Akhara to Sunni Waqf Board, here's a brief introduction of all the major parties involved in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case

The Supreme Court will on Saturday give its verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case.

The legal battle for the disputed structure in Ayodhya dates back to the 19th century. And the case is much more complicated than the Hindu-Muslim dispute that it is often presented as. There are several Hindu and Muslim parties involved, with contradictory positions.

Here's a brief introduction of all the major parties involved in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case:

Gopal Singh Visharad

Gopal Singh Visharad, in 1950, was the first to approach court for the dispute. Visharad, a resident of Ayodhya, filed a case in the court of the civil judge, Faizabad, seeking permission to worship the deities installed at "Asthan Janma Bhoomi". After his death in 1986, his son Rajendra Singh has been representing him in the case.

Nirmohi Akhara

Nirmohi Akhara was one of the parties to receive a third of the disputed site in the 2010 judgement by the Allahabad High Court. It is one of the fourteen akharas recognised by the Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad.

The Nirmohi Akhara’s claim over the disputed site goes back to 1885. Reports say its then mahant, Raghubar Das, had instituted a suit against the administration of Faizabad, the district in which Ayodhya is located. However, the court dismissed this.

It again moved the Faizabad civil court in December 1959 claiming ownership of the disputed structure.

Deoki Nandan Agarwal

Deoki Nandan Agarwal, a senior advocate and retired Allahabad High Court judge, filed a writ petition at the High Court on July 1, 1989 seeking his appointment as Ram Lalla's 'sakha' (friend). The court appointed him the 'sakha' the day his petition was admitted.

As 'Ram sakha', Agarwal filed civil suit no 5 on behalf of the deity at Ram Janmabhoomi and Asthan Janmabhoomi, where Ram Lalla was represented as plaintiff no 1.

After his death on April 8, 2002, a retired history professor at Banaras Hindu University (BHU), T P Verma, was appointed the next 'sakha'. Triloki Nath Pandey took charge as Ram sakha in early 2010 after Verma applied for retirement from the status.

Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha  

Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha, one of the main litigants in the Ayodhya title suits, moved the Supreme Court in December 2010 to challenge the 2010 Allahabad High Court order.

The political party sought partial annulment of  the high court's verdict. It has been against any division of the site.

The Hindu Mahasabha was founded in 1915 to "protect the rights of the Hindu community in British India". Despite being one of the oldest political party in India, its influence on Indian politics has remained only marginal.

Mahant Suresh Das

Mahant Das seeks the same permission from the SC as Gopal Singh Visharad, i.e., to worship at the disputed site. He represents the Ayodhya-based Digambar Akhara. In 1950, the then mahant of the Akhara, Paramhans Ram Chandra Das, had filed a petition in the Faizabad court.

Akhil Bhartiya Sri Ram Janam Bhoomi Punarudhar Samiti

The Samiti is one of the defendants in a lawsuit filed by a Muslim party. A petition challenging the 2010 high court verdict was also filed by the Samiti. The petition was admitted in the Supreme Court in August 2011. Later, a SC bench tagged the plea with the main case.

M Siddiq

M Siddiq is the original litigant in the case. He was the general secretary of the Jamiat-ul Ulema-i Hind in Uttar Pradesh. The Jamiat’s maulana Ashhad Rashidi became the petitioner after Siddiq's death.

The petition filed by him on behalf of the Jamiat became the title suit in the Ayodhya case.

Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board

Sunni Central Waqf Board claims possession of the mosque. It had filed a suit in the Faizabad civil court in 1961, demanding possession of the site and removal of idols from the mosque premises.

Mohammad Hashim Ansari

Hashim Ansari was one of the oldest litigant in the Babri Masjid case. He was associated with the Babri Masjid case since 1949, being among the persons arrested for breaching public order after idols of Lord Ram were placed in the mosque.

In 1961, he along with six others, became the main plaintiff in the ‘Ayodhya title suit’ filed by the Sunni Central Waqf Board.

Born in Ayodhya, Ansari’s father was a tailor who owned a shop in the Shringar Haat area. He died in 2016.

His son Iqbal Ansari became the petitioner after his death.

Haji Misbahuddeen

A resident of Faizabad, Haji Misbahuddeen was among the few Muslim locals of Ayodhya who were impleaded as defendants in the suits filed by the Hindu parties.

Before him, his grandfather Shahabuddin and father Ziauddin had contested the case.

Haji Phenku

Haji Phenku was among the prominent defenders in the case during the early phase.

One of the biggest property owners in Ayodhya at the time, Phenku was among the five local Muslim men named as defendants one of the case. After his death in 1960, his son Haji Mahboob Ahmad replaced him as the defendant.

Farooq Ahmad

Farooq Ahmad is also among the oldest litigants in the case. He died in December 2014 and was replaced by his youngest son Mohammad Umar.

Ahmad's father was one of the original complainant regarding the placing of the idols of Lord Rama in Babri Masjid in December 1949.

Shia Central Board of Waqf

The Shia waqf board claims the Babri Masjid to be its property, saying that the masjid was constructed by Babur’s commander Mir Baqi, a Shia.

The board has moved Supreme Court against a 1946 trial court ruling that had ruled the Babri Masjid to be a Sunni property.