Supreme Court may form new bench to hear ISKCON Bengaluru temple dispute
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider setting up a fresh bench to hear a plea seeking a review of its May 16, 2025 judgment, which ruled that the Hare Krishna temple in Bengaluru belongs to ISKCON Bangalore.
A counsel for ISKCON Mumbai urged a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana to constitute a new bench to decide the long-pending dispute. The counsel noted that the review plea had earlier been listed before two separate benches headed by Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Dipankar Datta, but had not been listed since then.
“We will consider this,” the Chief Justice said.
The legal battle centres on the ownership and control of the iconic temple and educational complex in Bengaluru. ISKCON Bangalore, a Karnataka-registered society, has maintained that it has operated independently and managed the temple for decades. ISKCON Mumbai, registered under the national Societies Registration Act, 1860, and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, has claimed rights over the property, asserting that ISKCON Bangalore is merely its branch.
The dispute dates back to a 2009 order by a local court in Bengaluru, which ruled in favour of ISKCON Bangalore and granted a permanent injunction against ISKCON Mumbai. However, the Karnataka High Court reversed that ruling in 2011, upholding a counterclaim by ISKCON Mumbai and granting it control over the temple.
ISKCON Bangalore then moved the Supreme Court on June 2, 2011, challenging the High Court decision. On May 16, 2025, a bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka, since retired, and Augustine George Masih set aside the High Court order and held that the property belonged to ISKCON Bangalore. The bench noted that the trial court had recorded a finding that no evidence was produced by ISKCON Mumbai about its possession of the Schedule ‘A’ property, and there was absolutely no evidence to support its claim.
Later, in November 2025, a bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari, since retired, and A.G. Masih delivered a split verdict on ISKCON Mumbai’s plea seeking a review of the May 16 judgment. Justice Maheshwari found that ISKCON Mumbai had made out a case for review, saying, “Applications for listing the review petitions in open court are allowed. Notice be issued to the parties.” This indicated that the Mumbai branch should be allowed to argue its case in open court, pointing out an “error apparent” in the judgment.
Justice Masih, however, dismissed the review petitions, stating: “After having carefully gone through the review petitions, the judgment under review and the material annexed therewith, I am satisfied there is no error apparent on the face of record or any merit in the review petitions, warranting reconsideration of the judgment impugned.”
In view of the divergent views, the bench had directed that the review petitions be placed before the Chief Justice of India for directions.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to consider setting up a fresh bench brings the matter closer to a resolution. The dispute has been a long legal battle between two societies with similar names and spiritual missions, both claiming rights over the temple. The fresh bench, if constituted, will hear the review plea and decide whether the May 2025 judgment requires reconsideration.
