The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Hindu parties’ lawyers to present objective evidence to show that a temple, especially one dedicated to Lord Ram, once stood on the Ramjanmabhumi.

Both Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said the lawyers need not labour to prove that people believed in Ramjanmabhumi. People’s faith had never been in question. The lawyers instead should present evidence on their claim that a massive temple stood on the exact spot.

August 21 saw senior advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan for Ram lalla concluding his arguments by submitting that the Ramjanmabhumi was itself a deity and could not be partitioned. “If the property itself is the deity, nobody can claim ownership of the land. Nobody can claim adverse possession [on the basis of Babri mosque],” he submitted.

Mr. Vaidyanathan contended that if there was once a temple on the Ramjanmabhumi and people were worshipping there as the birthplace, then nobody could possibly claim ownership by adverse possession.

He said the Ayodhya deity was a perpetual minor. The property of a minor cannot be dealt with, sold or alienated. He questioned how the Allahabad High Court, in its verdict in September 2010, could have handed over the property of the minor Ayodhya deity to others.