Justice Dharam Veer Sharma, one of the three judges hearing the Babri title suit, on Monday, put up a dissenting note saying that he disagreed with the other two judges’ decision to reject the plea for deferring the Ayodhya verdict.
Justice Sharma said that there was sufficient reason to expect an amicable settlement to the Ayodhya dispute. He added that he was not consulted when then three-judge bench gave the order on the petition on Friday.
It may be recalled that the plea to defer verdict on the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit was rejected by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court on Friday.
Justice Sharma favoured the option of exploring the possibility of mediation or an out-of-court settlement between the various parties.
He said that looking to the application for deferment from "all and any angle," the only direction required to be given is that parties are free to resolve their dispute amicably by compromise before the date of delivery of the judgment and at this stage no interference of the court is required.
The application for deferment of the verdict was made by one Ramesh Chandra Tripathi under section 89 CPC.
"I am sorry to state that at the time of the passing of the order I was not consulted, otherwise, I would have given my views to honourable brother judges," Justice Sharma said in his eight-page order.
While disagreeing with his two co-judges on a related issue, Justice Sharma also said that Tripathi was not required to pay the fine imposed on him by the other two judges.