The great godfather of CPC contradicted?

If persons who studied CPC in NLSIU in the first trimester of the academic year 2007-2008 remember, Prof. Shankara Reddy who has been teaching the course ever since it has been invented had given us a funny example to decide what can be considered a dispute of a civil nature. The specific example he had given, if I remember right, was that a dispute as to what kind of Nama should be drawn on the forehead of the deity will not be a dispute of a civil nature. However, the Karnataka High Court seems to have admitted such a case. Though the link given here does not specify so, I have heard elsewhere that it is currently being heard on merits. Not only that, the case has already been decided by the Srirangapatna Court which has decreed in favour of the plaintiff and ordered the temple authorities to make a Nama on the forehead of the Yoganarasimhaswamy temple in the tengalai tradition as opposed to the Vadalai namam being followed by the temple in accordance with an order by the Muzrai department. Persons knowing anything about this are hereby requested to throw some light upon this.