NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a plea seeking to revive a legal dispute regarding a prime 4.7-acre property near the East Coast Road (ECR) in Chennai, which originally belonged to the family of the late legendary actor Sridevi.

A bench comprising Justices K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli issued notices to Sridevi’s husband, producer Boney Kapoor, and their daughters, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor, seeking their formal response. The apex court also ordered a status quo on the disputed land until the next date of hearing.

The Background of the Legal Battle

The legal controversy stems from a petition filed by siblings M.C. Sivakami and M.C. Natarajan, alongside their mother. The petitioners claimed a share in the multi-million-dollar property, arguing that the land originally belonged to their paternal grandfather.

They had approached the courts seeking a declaration that four foundational sale deeds—through which Sridevi and her sister acquired the 4.7-acre property back in 1988—were null, void, and fraudulent.

Trial Court vs. Madras High Court

Initially, Boney Kapoor and his daughters moved the trial court seeking the rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), arguing that the claims were legally untenable and barred by limitation. However, the trial court dismissed the application, noting that the issues raised involved disputed questions of fact that required a full trial.

Aggrieved by that decision, the Kapoor family approached the Madras High Court. The High Court allowed their plea and struck down the suit, criticizing it as a "vexatious" attempt and an abuse of the judicial process aimed at grabbing the property.

The High Court noted several flaws in the plaintiffs' case:

  • Suppression of Facts: The plaintiffs failed to disclose their father’s first marriage, rendering their mother's marriage legally questionable.

  • Lack of Locus Standi: The court observed that the petitioners were not Class-I legal heirs of M.C. Chandrasekaran and therefore lacked the legal standing to maintain the suit.

  • Barred by Limitation: The High Court pointed out that the sale deeds were executed in 1988 and remained unchallenged during their father’s lifetime, making it unbelievable that the plaintiffs only discovered the transactions after nearly 40 years in 2023.

What’s Next?

Challenging the Madras High Court's dismissal, the petitioners knocked on the doors of the Supreme Court. With the apex court now intervening, issuing notices, and directing a status quo, the high-profile property battle has entered a crucial new phase. The matter will be heard further after responses from the Kapoor family are filed.