Temples owned huge land and resources, and
British administrators held that the legal owner of the wealth was the deity, with a Shebait or manager acting as trustee.
The other‘Hindu' party in the case is the Nirmohi Akhara which, after initially arguing for the dismissal of the Lord's plea, told the court on August 27 that it would not“press the issue of maintainability of Suit Number 5 of 1989(filed by the deity through Agarwal) provided they(lawyers for Ramlalla)
do not dispute the‘Shebait' right of the Akhara”.