The following are the highlights of the Supreme Court judgment wherein it declined to set up a larger bench for a re-look of its 1994 verdict which held a "mosque is not an essential part of the practice of Islam", paving the way for the apex court to hear the politically sensitive main Ayodhya title suit.
* A Muslim group had assailed the observations made by a five-judge Constitution bench in 1994 in the Ismail Faruqui case.
* In a majority verdict of 2:1, Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Ashok Bhushan say earlier observation was made in the limited context of "land acquisition".
* Observations were neither relevant for deciding the suits nor for deciding these appeals.
* No case has been made out to refer the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Ismail Faruqui case for reconsideration.
* SC says has to find out the context in which the five-judge bench had delivered the 1994 judgement.
* Justice S A Nazeer, the third judge, dissented with the majority view.
* He said the question whether mosque was essential part of the religion cannot be decided without a "detailed examination of the beliefs, tenets and practice of the faith" and favoured reconsideration of the issue to a larger bench.
* Justice Nazeer said the questionable observation of 1994 verdict had permeated into the Allahabad High Court's decision in land dispute case.
* He held that the larger bench should decide whether the test for determining the essential practice is both essentiality and integrality.
* Civil suit on land dispute will be heard by a newly constituted three-judge bench from October 29.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)