The Babri Masjid– Ram Janmabhoomi dispute is a land ownership dispute which came to life over 134 years ago between two of India’s most numerically-dominant religious communities. A 1045 page long judgement, M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Das (‘Siddiq’) is riddled with socio-political and religious complications, given the centuries-old tension between the two communities. This burdened the Supreme Court to disintegrate these complications and focus on the proprietary rights issues, including, inter alia, Title of Property, Exclusive Possession, and Dispossession of Property, which forms this dispute’s legal framework. In analysing this disintegration, certain visible inconsistencies occur within the legal reasonings used in the judgement with respect to the allocation of the 2.77 acres of land. However, in the process of delivering its verdict that the disputed fragment of land belonged to Bhagwan ShriRam Virajman, the Court reduced the questions of who has title over property to questions of which community’s faith is stronger, and thereby digressed from the legal framework of this dispute. This paper attempts to discover, disclose and discuss these very inconsistencies. It addresses the Supreme Court’s dilemma when resolving the property issues independent from the contemporary socio-religious issues. Finally, it also analyses the implications of the Siddiq Judgement on present and future mandir-masjid disputes in the backdrop of the Places of Worship Act, 1991.