SC Reopens ISKCON Temple Battle, Admits Review Plea in 25-Year Bengaluru–Mumbai Feud

The Bench of Justices MM Sundresh, Prashant Kumar Mishra and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notice and agreed to hear the review plea filed by ISKCON India along with several connected petitions.

The Court has sought a response from the Bengaluru faction of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness and other parties involved in the decades-old conflict.

The dispute, which has spanned more than 25 years, centres on competing claims by the Mumbai-registered ISKCON (1971) and the Bengaluru society over ownership and control of the temple and related assets.

The Supreme Court’s May 16 ruling had overturned a 2011 Karnataka High Court decision that favoured the Mumbai faction, holding instead that the property was validly allotted to ISKCON Bengaluru, an independent society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act.

The revival of the battle follows a split verdict delivered on October 28 by a two-judge bench hearing ISKCON India’s initial review plea. Justice JK Maheshwari found merit in the Mumbai faction’s contention and called for an open-court hearing with responses from the Bengaluru society. Justice AG Masih, however, dismissed the review petitions, holding that no error apparent on the face of the record justified reconsideration of the May 16 judgment. The matter was then referred to the Chief Justice of India, who constituted the present three-judge bench.

According to a press release issued by ISKCON India, the petitioners placed before the Court over 6,000 pages of material, including judicial depositions, correspondence involving Madhu Pandit Dasa in his capacity as the then general secretary of ISKCON India, and documents that the Mumbai faction alleges show “systematic fraud, forgery and manipulation of public records” by individuals associated with the Bengaluru society.

Yudhistir Govinda Das, ISKCON India’s Director of Communications, said the Court’s decision to reopen the case marks a “significant milestone” and expressed hope that a full hearing will expose what the faction claims were efforts to “usurp the assets” of the institution, including the Bengaluru temple and the Akshaya Patra programme.

The May 16 ruling had held that the trial court’s 2009 decree in favour of ISKCON Bengaluru was justified, noting that the Bangalore Development Authority had executed the sale deed directly in favour of the Bengaluru society. The Court had found no evidence to support ISKCON Mumbai’s claim of ownership and concluded that alleged manipulations by individuals associated with the Bengaluru faction were irrelevant to deciding title over the Schedule A property.

The Karnataka High Court had earlier reversed the trial court’s decree and upheld ISKCON Mumbai’s counterclaim, effectively transferring control of the temple to the Mumbai faction. ISKCON Bengaluru challenged that order before the Supreme Court in June 2011.

Both societies share similar names and spiritual missions, but have asserted independent legal identities. While ISKCON Bengaluru claims decades of autonomous management of the temple, the Mumbai faction maintains that the Bengaluru society is merely its branch functioning under the national Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.