The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court by its 30 September 2010 verdict had ordered that the land around the disputed site would be divided into three parts – one for deity (Ramlala Virajmaan), another for Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu sect and an original litigant in the case, and third for the Muslims.
Earlier this year, at the outset of the hearing in the apex court, the court witnessed commotion as some lawyers objected to Dhavan's use of term Hindu Taliban and his comparing the razing of Babri Mosque on 6 December 1992 to that of destruction of Buddha statues in Afghanistan's Bamiyan by the Taliban.
Refusing to budge from his description of Hindu Taliban, Dhavan had said he stood by every word and destruction of Babri Mosque on 6 December 1992 was an act of terrorism.
As senior counsel CS Vaidyanathan appearing for one of the Hindu litigants described his arguments as "mockery", Dhavan said: "It is an argument based on the destruction of the mosque."
Dhavan said that the former Chief Justice, the late JS Verma, had said that Hindus must wear the cross of the destruction of the Babri Mosque.
At this, reminding Dhavan that it was incumbent upon senior lawyers to maintain "decorum" in the court, the Chief Justice described as "inappropriate" the words used by the senior lawyer.
Taking exception to the "inappropriate adjectives" used by Dhavan, he said that "adjectives" that are used in the course of the arguments should be the ones that have the acceptance of the court.
