Ayodhya verdict: live updates

12.26pm:
There's still much confusion about exactly what the court has ruled.

According to Indian TV, it decided to divide the site three ways, with Hindus and Muslims communities gaining the right to a third each of the site.

The information has not been confirmed and its unclear what group would control the remaining third. The ruling is due to be published in full here, later today.

The demolition of the 16th century mosque by Hindu mobs in 1992 triggered some of India's worst riots that killed about 2,000 people.

More than 200,000 police have been deployed across India to guard against any communal violence.

Hindus want to build a temple on the site. Muslims want the mosque rebuilt after it was demolished in 1992.

Whatever the verdict it is almost certain to be challenged in the supreme court and a final decision could take years.

12.42pm:
More confusion, now AP is saying that Hindus will get a two-thirds stake, and Muslims one third.

It cited Ravi Shankar Prasad, a lawyer for one of the parties in the suit. He said the Muslim community would get one third and two Hindu groups would split the remainder.

As expected a lawyer for the Muslim community says he will appeal. Zaffaryab Jilani said the verdict was "a step forward" but he would appeal to the supreme court.

12.50pm:
The judgments have been published online. The "brief" summary runs to 24 pages.

12.54pm:
This seems to be the key passage from ruling of SU Khan, one of the judges involved:

All the three sets of parties, i.e. Muslims, Hindus and Nirmohi Akhara are declared joint title holders of the property/ premises in dispute.

12.57pm:
Our Delhi correspondent, Jason Burke, has this instant take on the ruling.

Three Indian judges ruled that the disputed religious site in Ayodhya, claimed by both Muslims and Hindus, should be shared by both communities.

In one of the longest awaited and most controversial judgment in the nation's history, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court decided against the claim by Muslim community representatives in the northern city that they should be allowed to rebuild a 16th century mosque, demolished by a mob of Hindu extremists in 1992.

The site of the mosque would be split between two Hindu groups and one Muslim group, they said.

But the 2,000 page judgment ordered that the status quo at the religious compound in Ayodhya at the centre of the dispute - currently under state control - would be maintained for three months.

Lawyers representing the Muslim claimants said they were "partly disappointed" and that they would appeal the decision to the supreme court.

Chaotic scenes accompanied the release of the judgment after lawyers for Hindu groups left the court before it was published as planned on a website. They held an impromptu press conference claiming victory by quoting parts of the judgment.

1.08pm:
The international Hindu organisation, Viśva Hindu Parishad, has welcomed the verdict according to the Press Trust of India.

"We welcome the judgment. The faith of one billion Hindus that Lord Ram was born here has been endorsed by the judiciary", VHP international general secretary Pravin Togadia told PTI.

He said the judgment would now pave the way for construction of Ram temple at the disputed site.

1.19pm:
Jason Burke gauges reaction and explains some of the initial confusion surrounding the verdict.

Immediate reaction here muted. In part due to the complexity of the issue and the judgment. The decision was meant to be released on a website and handed to the media.

Instead there were chaotic scenes as lawyers for the Hindu side left the court and
held a largely inaudible impromptu press conference.

So far, everyone is just trying to work out exactly what this all means. Statements are expected from major political parties, including the Hindu nationalists, the Bharatiya Janata Party, very much involved in the destruction of the mosque back in 1992 and in building the issue of the temple into a major cause, in the next hour or so. All are likely to call for calm.

Zaffaryab Jilani, one of the lawyers for the Muslim community's representatives, has stuck to a conciliatory line. Certainly there's no sign of any inflammatory rhetoric or immediate outburst of anger from anyone.

But the threat comes from some small incident somewhere spiralling out of control. With 200,000 troops, police and paramilitaries deployed, authorities should be able to move fast enough to stop that happening.

1.25pm:
Mohan Bhagwat, head of the Hindu nationalist group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, said the verdict should not be seen as victory for any group.

But he is quoted in the Hindu claiming the judgment paves the way for the construction of a Hindu Ram temple.

"The judgment is not a win or loss for anybody. We invite everybody, including Muslims, to help build the temple," he said.

1.31pm:
Police have arrested more than 10,000 people to prevent them from inciting violence, according to Jason's full report on the verdict.

1.39pm:
Some Muslims have welcomed the judgment, according to Reuters.

"The judgment can begin a process of reconciliation," Kamal Farooqi, a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, told the agency.

1.46pm:
Hindu groups are also planning an appeal to the supreme court, according to Jason Burke.

2.00pm:
Here's a summary of events so far.

A court in India has ruled that Ayodhya, the holy site of a demolished mosque in India should be divided between Hindus and Muslims. The Lucknow court ruled by a majority of two to one in favour of giving two thirds of the land to Hindus - one third each to two Hindu groups - and one third to Muslims.
Initial reaction from both Muslim and Hindu leaders was conciliatory. But both sides in the dispute have said they will appeal.
There is still widespread fear that the ruling will spark violence. Police have arrested more than 10,000 people to prevent them from inciting violence, while another 100,000 had to sign affidavits saying they would not cause trouble after the verdict, officials said.

2.39pm:
This is Mark Tran taking over from Matt who has finished for the day. More reaction is coming in from politicians and leaders of religious groups. This is the latest from Jason Burke, who writes:

The reaction is all relatively conciliatory but an underlying theme to many of the statements from the Hindu nationalists is that the judgment will now allow them to construct a temple on the site of the former mosque - a long-standing demand. It is unclear - as experts go through the judgment carefully - if that is the case or not but is likely to be a cause for further controversy. Some commentators are praising the judgment as laying the ground for better relations between religious communities in India. One element that is fairly clear is that the judges themselves were divided on many key points.

The actual ruling says: "it is further declared that the portion below the central dome where at present the idol is kept in a makeshift temple will be allotted to Hindus in final decree."

2.55pm:
The Times of India is reporting that prime minister Manmohan Singh will meet senior officials to discuss the implications of the Ayodhya verdict. The law and order situation will be also reviewed, a senior official told the paper.
Top officials from the BJP, the Hindu nationalist party, will be holding their own meeting to discuss what to do next.

3.08pm:
The Guardian's Derek Brown covered the violence that broke out across India when Hindu extremists razed the Babri mosque in 1992. His articles make fascinating reading. The BBC has this q&a on the background to the dispute.

3.17pm:
Jason Burke spoke of the divisions among the three judges. You can find more about them in this piece from Manorama online.

Justice Dharam Veer Sharma is the one who gave a dissenting verdict and refrained from signing the Sep 17 order issued by the special bench turning down the plea for postponement of the final verdict slated for September 24. In his view, parties involved in the case should have been given the freedom to try and work out an amicable settlement.

3.43pm:
This is what Bloomberg, the financial wire, is reporting:

Analysts said the issue that helped propel the BJP to power in 1998 may no longer have the power to spark widespread unrest. "The dispute has lost its intensity," said Javeed Alam, chairman of the Indian Council of Social Science Research, in New Delhi. "People want this dispute to be buried."

Meanwhile, Jason Burke reports that L K Advani, a veteran BJP leader, is also taking the line that the Ram temple at Ayodhya can now be built.

3.56pm:
This is how Reuters is reporting the verdict.

Muslims did appear the biggest losers. But Muslim organisations were measured in their response, careful not to inflame public tensions in a country where they account for only 13% of the 1.2 billion plus population. There were no immediate reports of violence after the ruling. "It was a very sensible judgment and the court has tried to balance the parties," said Anil Verma, a political analyst. "Apportioning one-third to the Muslims means they have not completely lost."

4.06pm:
We are wrapping things up here. Many thanks for all your comments.