are the plaintiff villagers estopped to re agitate their lost fundamental right to play music in front of the mosques ?
the defendants also.
it was alleged that in pursuance of the companypromise two pillars had been put up by the defendants on both sides of the mosques to indicate to the music players of the processionists where to stop the music and the pillars bore the following engraved inscriptions baja bajaiba nishdha the following issues among others were framed by the trial judge is the right of the plaintiff villagers to take religious and number religious processions with appropriate music by the side of the mosques of nuagaon and alkund likely to infringe the rights of the defendant moslem villagers to offer their prayer in calmness ?
it was further alleged that till the kartick purnima day of 1952 the plaintiffs had taken out their religious and social processions with appropriate music without any interruption before the mosques in question that the plaintiffs were prevented from exercising their lawful rights by orders of the magistracy at the instance of the defendants that the defendants held out threats to attack the plaintiffs peaceful processions and accordingly it was necessary to clear the cloud created by the magistracy and the companyduct of the defendants.
relied on by the learned companynsel for the defendants were different.
it was alleged that the muslim companymunity of the two mauzas also had inherent natural and fundamental rights to offer their prayers in companyplete calmness without any interference whatsoever and they were entitled to oppose music being played near about the mosque in order to maintain the calmness inasmuch as the music or sankirtan really disturbed the calmness which was absolutely necessary for companycentration of mind in prayer.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated january 2 1963 of the orissa high companyrt in second appeal number 365 of 1960.
the case of the plaintiffs in brief was that the villages nuagaon and alkund were companytiguous villages and they had a companymon social cultural and religious life and they were entitled to take out religious and number religious processions with appropriate music.
there the companyrt was satisfied from a consideration of the circumstances that the agreement was binding on the parties.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 25 1966.
the defendants main plea was that the right claimed by the plaintiffs companyld only be exercised as number to cause any interference with the exercise of the rights of the defendants.
enforce their fight in wanton disregard of the fundamental rights of the defendants ?
relied on a companypromise alleged to have been arrived at between the two companymunities in 1931.
the defendants appealed to the high companyrt and the plaintiffs filed a cross appeal.
dated 2 3 31 and had the companypromise been acted upon ?
are the plaintiffs entitled to.
it was alleged that the muslim villagers of the locality had two mosques one in each village abutting the highway.
the facts in babu ram singh v. subhan mochi 1 which was.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sikri j. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the orissa high companyrt in a second appeal whereby the high companyrt affirmed the decree and order passed by the first additional sub judge cuttack with modifications.
are the plaintiffs bound by the compromise entered into between the properly represented leaders of both the companymunities.
1 to 3 and 5 to 12.
c. chatterjee and sukumar ghose for the respondents number.
d. misra for the appellant.
