Ayodhya Verdict: Key takeaways from Supreme Court's historic judgement

The five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court has pronounced the verdict on the long-standing Ayodhya land dispute case. The court has said that the Ram Temple will be built on the 2.77 acres disputed land while a separate land will be given by the government for the mosque at an alternate 'suitable' location. The apex court said the mosque should be constructed at a "prominent site" and a trust should be formed within three months for the construction of the temple at the site many Hindus believe Lord Ram was born.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday had appealed to the country to maintain calm and had said the judgement in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute is not a matter of victory or defeat.

Here are the key takeaways from Ayodhya verdict

SC grants entire 2.77 acre of disputed land in Ayodhya to deity Ram Lalla.
SC asks Centre to consider granting some kind of representation to Nirmohi Akhara in setting up of trust.
Damage to Babri mosque was a violation of law: SC.
On the contrary, Hindus established their case that they were in possession of outer courtyard: SC.
UP Sunni Central Waqf Board has failed to establish its case in Ayodhya dispute: SC.
Muslims were not in possession of outer courtyard of the site: SC.
Faith of Hindus that Lord Rama was born at demolished structure is undisputed: SC
Hindus consider this place as birthplace of lord Ram, even Muslims say this about disputed place: SC.
Evidence suggest Hindus were in possession of outer court yard, says SC
Title cannot be established on ground of faith, belief; they are kind of indicator for deciding dispute: SC.
Faith of Hindus that Lord Rama was born at demolished structure is undisputed: SC.
Hindus consider this place as birthplace of lord Ram, even Muslims say this about disputed place: SC.
ASI had not established whether temple was demolished to build the mosque.
The underlying structure was not an Islamic structure.
The fact that there lied a temple beneath the destroyed structure has been established by the ASI: SC.
Title cannot be established on ground of faith, belief; they are kind of indicator for deciding dispute: SC.
Iron railing was set up at site in 1856-1857, it suggests Hindus kept worshipping at the site: SC.
Despite obstruction caused in offering prayers at Mosque, evidence suggest that there was no abandonment: SC.
Evidence suggests Muslims offered Friday prayers at mosque which indicates they have not lost possession: SC.
Extensive nature of Hindus worshipping at outer courtyard at site has been there: SC.
SC dismisses plea of Nirmohi Akhara seeking control of entire disputed land.
SC asks centre to frame scheme within 3 months and set up a trust for construction of a temple.
Centre, UP govt can monitor together future actions by authorities: SC.
Suitable land of 5 acre be handed over to Sunni Waqf board at prominent place for mosque