ISKCON Mumbai vs. Bangalore Temple Control Case

Current Case Status and Recent Development

Latest Status: A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Review Petition filed by ISKCON Mumbai. The hearing is set for January 22, 2026.

Basis for Review: The court stated that if a "finding of fact has been wrongly recorded contrary to material available," it can be grounds for a review. ISKCON Mumbai alleges that the May 2025 judgment was based on forged documents submitted by the Bengaluru faction and that critical evidence was overlooked.

Unusual Procedure: It is very rare for the Supreme Court to hear review petitions in an open court hearing; they are typically decided in judges' chambers. This highlights the complexity of the case.

Timeline of the Legal Dispute

May 2025 The Supreme Court overturns the High Court, restoring the 2009 trial court verdict in favor of ISKCON Bangalore.

May 2011 The Karnataka High Court overturns the trial court, ruling the Bangalore temple is a branch of ISKCON Mumbai.

April 2009 A civil trial court in Bengaluru rules in favor of ISKCON Bangalore, affirming its authority over the temple.

December 2025 The Supreme Court agrees to a Review Petition filed by ISKCON Mumbai, scheduling a new hearing for January 2026.

Key Arguments from Both Sides

ISKCON Mumbai's Core Claim

They argue they are the sole official ISKCON entity in India, registered in 1971 by the founder Srila Prabhupada. They allege that the Bengaluru faction, led by Madhu Pandit Das, revived a defunct 1978 society through forgery and fraud to claim ownership after facing disciplinary action.

ISKCON Bangalore's Core Claim

They maintain they are an independent society legally registered in 1978. They argue the temple land was allotted to their society in 1988 and built with local funds, asserting their autonomy from the Mumbai body.

What to Expect Next

The Supreme Court's task in the January 2026 hearing will be two-fold:

1. Decide whether it has the jurisdiction to review the May 2025 judgment.

2. Examine the merits of the case, particularly the allegations of document forgery and whether they were relevant to the ownership question.

This means the final ownership of the temple is not yet legally settled. The review hearing could potentially lead to the May 2025 verdict being upheld, modified, or set aside.