Apr 14, 2015 INDIA (SUN) (Corrected) There are some news items in media, web sites, etc. in respect of recent Bangalore High Court Judgment ( by a single Judge) in the case of Prasannatma Das, Amiya Vilas Swami & others -vs- Madhu Pandit das & others in the RFA 423 of 2009. The news reports are partly false and partly misleading. The following is the brief explanation.
1. ISKCON reg. by Shrila Prabhupada in 1971 in Mumbai was not party to this Appeal in which the decision was made.
2.The issue before the High Court in this Appeal was to decide as to who has the right to represent ISKCON society registered by Shankhbhrit, Amiya Vilas Swami & others in Bangalore in 1978. Amiya Vilas Swami and others claim that they have the right to represent this Bangalore society reg. in 1978 and Madhu Pandit das and others claim that Madhu Pandit has the right to represent this Bangalore society registered in 1978.
3.Amiya Vilas Swami and others claim that Madhu Pandit das and others are imposters and have nothing to do with the Bangalore society registered by them in 1978 in Bangalore. And therefore in 2003 they filed suit OS 1758 of 2003 in the Bangalore City Civil court. In the middle of the trial Amiya Vilas Swami and others withdrew their claim and informed the court that they are not prosecuting the suit. Thereafter the suit was dismissed by the Civil court.
4. Against that order the Appeal was filed in the High Court of Bangalore and numbered RFA 423 of 2009 which, recently on 9 April, 2015, was dismissed by the Single Judge of the Bangalore High Court . It is a fact that the plaintiffs (Amiya Vilas Swami) and others have changed stands. First he filed the suit then withdrew and then again prosecuted Appeal.
5.This suit (and Appeal) of Amiya Vilas Swami or the recent judgment of 9 April, 2015, can not and does not decide about ownership or management of the ISKCON Temple situated at Hare Krishna Hill, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore. Amiya Vilsa swami was not claiming right of ownership or right of management of the Temple. Amiya Vilas Swami was only asking for the right to represent the ISKCON Society registered by them in Bangalore in 1978.
6. The ownership and management of the Temple at Hare Krishna Hill, Bangalore, was a point to be decided in the other Appeal, i.e. RFA 421 of 2009. In this Appeal ISKCON reg. in Mumbai was the party. Amiya Vilas Swami was not party to that Appeal. In that Appeal the decision was made by the Division Bench (2 judges) of the Bangalore High Court in May 2011. That decision ruled that the Temple at Hare Krishna Hill, Bangalore belongs to ISKCON society registered by Shrila Prabhupada in 1971. Against this Madhu Pandit das (in the name of the ISKCON Society registered by Shankhbhrit in 1978) filed Appeal
in the Supreme Court and the matter is pending decision.
7. So there is no question of a single Judge of the High Court having power to upset or overrule the decision given by the Division Bench (2 judges) of the High court. Only the Supreme Court has power to do so.
8. In short, the recent High Court decision does not affect the position of the ISKCON society registered by Shrila Prabhupada in Mumbai in 1971. Mumbai
is the declared owner of the Bangalore Temple and it remains.
9. It is Amiya Vilas Swami and others right to represent the Bangalore society is decided against Amiya Vilas Swami and in favor of Madhu Pandit das.