EXCERPTS FROM JUDGEMENT GIVEN IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE IN RFA 421/2009
ISKCON (Defendents/Appellants)
Vs.
Madhupandit Das’s so called ISKCON society (Plaintiffs/Respondents)
In the aforesaid judgement the honorable judges at various places held that various frauds have been committed by Madhupandit Das (MPD). The instances and the exact wordings given in the judgement are given hereunder:
MPD’s so called ISKCON society is
illegal and dead
1. On page 29, para no. 27, while referring to the constitution of the plaintiff society, it is held that,
“the plaintiff society is not a legally constituted body.”
2. On page 29, para no. 28, it is held that,
“There is no evidence on record to show as to when Madhupandit Das, the President of the plaintiff Society, Stoka Krishna Das, the Secretary of the plaintiff society and other office bearers were admitted as members of the plaintiff society.”
MPD created fraud documents
3. On page 31, para no. 29, it is held that,
“In the instant case, the plaintiff society has not produced any order passed by the Registrar of societies condoning the delay caused in filing the reports and accepting the reports filed by the plaintiff society. Further, a perusal of these reports indicate that they are tailor made to suit the convenience of the plaintiff society. It is noticed from these reports that some portions of the resolutions are typed, some portions are handwritten and some portions are computer sheets. Some portions are antidated and some other resolutions are passed from the place when the same was not in the possession of the plaintiff.”
4. On page 32, para no. 30, it is held that,
“From 1978 till March 2002 the plaintiff society has not filed its return of income with the Income Tax Department.”
MPD Tampered with Documents
5. On page 34, para no. 32, while referring to documents relating to telephone connections it is held that,
“A perusal of these documents specify that there are insertions and the round rubber seal of the plaintiff society was affixed at a later stage.”
6. On page 36, para no. 34, while referring to evidences of copies of returns filed under the Sales Tax Act, it is held that,
“It is also seen from these documents that there are insertions and affixing of the round rubber stamp seal of plaintiff society in an unusual manner.”
7. On page 37, para no. 35, while referring to insufficient documentary evidences produced to prove existence of plaintiff society, it is held that,
“Therefore, the plaintiff society miserably failed to prove that it had legal existence as an independent autonomous body engaged in spreading the ISKCON movement at Bangalore.”
MPD Cooked up documents and hid from Court
8. On page 49, para no. 46, while referring to resolution passed by the management committee of the plaintiff society supporting the wrong declaration made by Madhupandit Das, it is held that,
“This resolution by the Management Committee of the plaintiff society is a unilateral document cooked up for the purpose of this case…… Though the plaintiff society mentioned the name of Madhupandit Das in its list of witnesses filed before the Trial Court, he was not examined. Thus the plaintiff withheld the best evidence with an intention that if he is examined, his evidence would go against the plaintiff. Non-examination of this important witness Madhupandit Das is fatal to the case of the plaintiff.”
MPD Manipulated BDA Records
9. On page 55, para no. 50, while referring to illegal insertions in possession certificate issued by Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), it is held that,
“Therefore, the draft possession certificate Ex. P. 203 containing the round rubber stamp seal of the plaintiff society is a concocted document and the same cannot be believed.”
10. On page 59, para no. 54, while referring to certified copies of documents issued by BDA, it held that,
“The certified copies produced before the Court specify that certain pages are missing from the BDA record, certain insertions are made in the BDA record and there is tampering of certain documents. This material on record do not repose confidence in the mind of the Court that the plaintiff society applied for allotment of land and the same was allotted to it and it took possession of the same.”
MPD’s Conspiracy to steal ISKCON Temple
11. On page 71, para no. 65, while referring to various correspondence by Madhupandit Das, it is held that,
“Up to the year 1999 in the entire correspondence and the judicial proceedings as stated above there is no reference with regard to the existence of plaintiff society. No material is placed on record to show that the plaintiff society was engaged in building the ISKCON movement in the state of Karnataka and in particular in Bangalore city.”
12. On page 73, para no. 67, it is held that,
“On one side, theological differences. On the other side, the action of defendant No. 1 (i.e. ISKCON Mumbai) to suspend Madhupandit Das. Further Madhupandit Das failed to get temporary injuction in O.S. No. 4467/2000 and O.S. No. 1483/2001. At the same time Madhupandit Das and his associates were not ready to give up their control and authority over the huge assets of Bangalore branch. Richer the endowment, greater will be the temptation to swallow the same. Under these circumstances, Madhupandit Das and his associates conspired to claim right of ownership not only over the income, but over the idol, the deity of the temple and the entire assets of the temple. Madhupandit Das and his associates had taken advantage of the identical name of the plaintiff society’s “International Society for Krishna Consciousness” and the defendant’s branch “International Society for Krishna Consciousness”. This is how Madhupandit Das and his associates started claiming that there was no defendants’ branch at Bangalore and the ISKCON movement at Bangalore was built by plaintiff society and the schedule properties belong to the plaintiff society.”
MPD Manipulated ISKCON Temple Accounts
13. On page 77, para no. 69, while referring to manipulation of accounts, it is held that,
“In the meanwhile Madhupandit Das and his associates manipulated the accounts in the name of plaintiff society and got audited from an auditor by name V. L. Varadaraj for 12 years from 1989 to 2000…… Thus it is clear that an attempt was made to give life to the defunct plaintiff society.”
MPD Family Cooked up Documents to Gain Control Over ISKCON Temple
14. On page 77, para no. 70, it is held that,
“Further, Madhupandit Das, his wife Bhakti Lata Devi Dasi, his co-brother Chanchalapati Das, his wife’s sister Chamari Devi Dasi and other close associates cooked up reports specifying the names of these persons as elected office bearers of plaintiff society and filed the same in the office of Registrar of Societies for the first time on 21.08.2001 for the entire period of 12 years from 1989 to 2001. As already stated these reports are cooked up for the purpose of giving life to the defunct plaintiff society.”
15. On page 78, para no. 71, while referring to the question raised in point no. 6 on page 20 as to, “Whether the defendants prove that plaintiff society, by taking advantage of 1st defendant’s branch name ISKCON Bangalore is claiming illegally and fraudulently the schedule property as its property?”, it is held that, “Hence, point no. 6 is answered in ‘affirmative’.”
16. On page 79, para no. 72, it is held that,
“The plaintiff society has miserably failed to prove and establish that it is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of plaint schedule properties. On the other hand, it is found that the plaintiff, a defunct society, by taking advantage of similarity in the name of Bangalore branch of defendant No. 1 and by fabricating documents, is falsely claiming the plaint schedule properties. There is no evidence on record to show that plaintiff society built the ISKCON movement in the State of Karnataka and it acquired the schedule properties.”
MPD is under ISKCON Bureau
17. On page 80, para no. 74, it is held that,
“Admittedly, Madhupandit Das and other full time devotees are heading the branch of defendant No. 1 at Bangalore. Therefore, Madhupandit Das and other functionaries in their capacity as President and functionaries of ISKCON Bangalore, as branch of defendant No. 1 are entitled to continue to function in accordance with the bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of defendant No. 1. However, it is made clear that their continuance as such shall be subject to the decision to be taken by ISKCON, Mumbai, in accordance with the bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of defendant no. 1.”
CONCLUSION
The Honorable High Court held that the ISKCON TEMPLE in Bangalore is not Madhupandit Das’s family business. It is a branch of ISKCON under the control of Bureau, the Governing Council of ISKCON registered in Mumbai. In other words, ISKCON Bangalore Temple is like any other 80 Temples of ISKCON in India.
[You can down load the original document from the High Court of Karnataka's website.]
To find out more about Madhu Pandits frauds visit www.ISKCON-bda.org