NEW DELHI: On an extended standing litigation between Mumbai and Bengaluru factions of Iskcon over management of Bengaluru temple, Supreme Court docket had saved the decision reserved for greater than a yr and gave judgment favouring the Bengaluru department in Could previous to the retirement of presiding decide Justice A S Oka. The bench of Justices Oka and A G Masih had put aside Karnataka Excessive Court docket’s detailed judgment in Could 2011 giving management of the Bengaluru temple to the Mumbai department. Excessive Court docket had quashed the trial courtroom decree of April 2009 which was in favour of the Bengaluru faction. After 14 years of the HC verdict and 6 months of Supreme Court docket judgment, pronounced per week earlier than Justice Oka’s retirement, the events are actually nearly again to sq. one as a bench of Justices J Okay Maheshwari and A G Masih (who was a part of the bench led by Justice Oka) delivered a break up verdict on the Mumbai department’s plea for evaluate of the Could 16 judgment. Justice Maheshwari discovered that the Mumbai department has made out a case for evaluate of the judgment. In his two sentence order, he stated, “Purposes for itemizing the evaluate petitions in open courtroom are allowed. Discover be issued to the events.” This could imply Justice Maheshwari felt that the Mumbai department needs to be allowed to argue its case in open courtroom stating the “error obvious” within the judgment. Alternatively, Justice Masih stated, “After having fastidiously gone by means of the evaluate petitions, the judgment underneath evaluate and the fabric annexed therewith, I’m glad there isn’t any error obvious on the face of document or any advantage within the evaluate petitions, warranting reconsideration of the judgment impugned. The evaluate petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.” “In view of the divergent views… the evaluate petitions be positioned earlier than the CJI for instructions and to do the needful,” the bench then stated. Iskcon-Mumbai had persistently maintained that the Bengaluru faction had by no means functioned as an unbiased entity and had at all times operated underneath the Mumbai department, and therefore, the administration of the temple vested with the Mumbai faction. However the trial courtroom had allowed the Bengaluru department’s go well with, and given a decree in its favour over the administration of the temple affairs. HC had put aside the decree and dominated that the Bengaluru department functioned underneath the overarching management of Mumbai group.