In a surprising turn of events, the Supreme Court bench has delivered a split verdict on a review petition concerning the ownership of the ISKCON temple in Bengaluru. This legal battle pits the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) Society of Mumbai against the ISKCON Society of Bangalore, reigniting a decades-long dispute.
The core issue revolves around which entity rightfully owns and manages the prominent ISKCON temple complex located in Bengaluru. In May 2025, a Supreme Court bench, comprised of Justice Abhay S Oka (since retired) and Justice AG Masih, ruled in favor of ISKCON Bangalore, setting aside a previous Karnataka High Court judgment that had favored ISKCON Mumbai. The High Court had concluded in 2011 that the Bangalore society was a branch of the Mumbai society and that the title and possession of the Hare Krishna Hills temple complex vested with ISKCON Mumbai. The Supreme court bench in May 2025, however, found the High Court's conclusion "completely erroneous" and "contrary to the documentary evidence".
ISKCON Mumbai then filed a review petition against this May 2025 judgment. With Justice Oka's retirement, the review petition was presented before a new bench consisting of Justices JK Maheshwari and AG Masih. It is here that the division emerged: Justice Maheshwari favored hearing the review petitions in open court and issued a notice to the respondents, while Justice Masih dismissed the review petitions, stating that the original judgment contained no apparent errors. Justice Masih stated he was satisfied that there was no error apparent on the face of record or any merit in the review petitions, warranting reconsideration of the judgment.
Given this divergence of opinion between the two judges, the matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice of India for further action. The Chief Justice will likely constitute a larger bench to re-examine the case and resolve the conflicting opinions. This split verdict introduces fresh uncertainty into the already complex legal landscape surrounding the temple's ownership.
The roots of this dispute trace back decades. ISKCON Bangalore was registered in 1978 under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. They claim to have acquired land in 1988 from the Bangalore Development Authority and subsequently constructed the temple and cultural complex, utilizing funds raised from devotees. ISKCON Mumbai, founded in 1966, argues that the Bangalore center never functioned as an independent entity and always operated as a branch under its control. They contend that all properties acquired in the name of ISKCON Bangalore rightfully belong to ISKCON Mumbai.
The implications of this legal battle extend beyond mere property ownership. They touch upon fundamental questions of corporate governance within religious societies and the legal relationship between different chapters of the same organization. The Supreme Court's ultimate decision will not only determine the fate of the Bengaluru temple but could also set a precedent for similar disputes involving religious institutions across India. The case, INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS, MUMBAI VERSUS INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS, BANGALORE & ORS., awaits a procedural resolution before the substantive arguments can be re-examined.
For now, the future of the Bengaluru ISKCON temple hangs in the balance, awaiting the Chief Justice's decision and the formation of a larger bench to settle this contentious issue.
