Petition in SC to save temple land from DK Shivakumar-linked body

A long-standing property dispute surrounding a historic temple in Bengaluru has reached the Supreme Court of India, with B Arasoji Rao Charities, a public religious and charitable trust, filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging a recent order of the Karnataka High Court.

The petition, filed on May 22 but coming up for a hearing on September 16, contests the High Court’s judgment dated April 29, 2025, which set aside a temporary injunction earlier granted in favour of the Trust by a trial court in Bengaluru. The dispute centers on 2 acres and 15 guntas of land in Jedihalli village, Magadi Road, which houses the Panduranga Vittala Temple, managed by the Trust for decades.

The property was originally purchased in 1938 by late B Arasoji Rao, a renowned philanthropist and timber merchant. Through a registered Will dated July 17, 1945, Rao created the Trust, entrusting it with the land for religious and charitable purposes. Following his death in 1945, the Will was probated in 1947, confirming the vesting of ownership in the Trust.

However, in 1961, Rao’s widow and adopted son executed a gift deed in favour of a third party, sparking decades of litigation. In 1980, the Trust filed a suit (O.S. No. 402/1980) challenging the deed. The trial court, in 1997, declared the gift deed void and reaffirmed the Trust’s ownership. This ruling was upheld by the Karnataka High Court in 2013 (RFA No. 733/1997), which categorically confirmed the Trust’s title and possession.

Despite these judicial findings, disputes resurfaced in 2024 when respondents allegedly interfered with the Trust’s possession. The Trust then approached the City Civil Court (O.S. No. 3397/2024), which on November 27, 2024, granted a temporary injunction restraining interference.

The respondents challenged this before the Karnataka High Court in Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 8690 of 2024. On April 29, 2025, the High Court allowed the appeal, reasoning that the temple might not be located on the disputed property but on an alternate site (CA Site No. 117).

In its petition, the Trust has argued that the High Court erred in overturning the trial court’s discretionary order without establishing that it was arbitrary or contrary to settled legal principles. Citing precedents such as Wander Ltd. v. Antox India Pvt. Ltd. (1990), the Trust has emphasised that appellate courts should not interfere with trial court discretion unless perversity is shown.

The petition further contends that the High Court ignored its own binding judgment from 2013, failed to apply the principle of res judicata, and entertained fresh factual disputes unsupported by credible evidence. It also warns of irreparable harm to religious and charitable activities, including to the presence of the founder’s samadhi within the temple premises.

The Trust has prayed for the Supreme Court to set aside the High Court’s April 29 ruling and restore the trial court’s injunction order. It has also sought interim protection to prevent any disturbance to the temple and its property until the matter is finally adjudicated.

The case, involving questions of property rights, judicial precedent, and the protection of religious endowments, is expected to attract significant attention when it comes up for hearing before the apex court as the respondents are linked to Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar. Shivakumar was the president of the Dasashrama International Trust, one of the parties to the dispute. Shivakumar resigned from the trust upon become the Deputy Chief Minister of Karnataka.