Kamal Ghorui
A property owned by the late actress Sridevi on Chennai’s East Coast Road (ECR) has been at the centre of a legal battle for nearly a year. Recent reports state that her husband Boney Kapoor, along with daughters Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor, have approached the Madras High Court after an additional district court in Chengalpattu refused to dismiss a civil suit concerning a 4.7-acre parcel of land that had been purchased by the actress. The dispute traces back to 2025, when Boney Kapoor first moved court alleging that three individuals had laid claim to the property. Since then, the matter has remained under judicial consideration.According to The Hindu, on Monday, March 16, Justice TV Thamilselvi agreed to hear the Kapoor family’s petition on March 26 and extended an interim order that stays the trial proceedings in the case. The report notes that three individuals, MC Sivakami, her sister MC Natarajan, and their mother Chandrabhanu—have claimed rights over a portion of the land owned by Sridevi. They have also sought to cancel four sale deeds through which the actress and her sister had acquired the 4.7-acre property.Responding to the claims, Boney Kapoor had told the court in 2025 that Sridevi had purchased the land in 1988. He also explained that the property originally belonged to M.C. Sambanda Mudaliar, who had three sons and two daughters, and that the land had been divided among the family members in 1960.In their petition, the Kapoor family contended that Chandrabanu’s marriage to M.C. Chandrasekaran, said to be the original owner of the property—took place while his first marriage was still legally valid, rendering the second union void under laws that prohibit bigamy. They further alleged that this crucial detail had not been disclosed by the plaintiffs. According to the publication, the Kapoor family stated, “Such suppression of a vital and legally relevant fact constitutes a deliberate attempt to mislead this court and amounts to fraud, vitiating the very foundation of their claim. The third respondent (Ms. Chandrabanu) was fully aware that her marriage on February 5, 1975, was contracted during the subsistence of his (Chandrasekaran’s) prior and legally valid marriage to M.C. Banumathi.”The family also pointed out that they have held the property for nearly 38 years and questioned how a lawsuit seeking to cancel sale deeds executed in 1988 could be filed only in 2025. They further argued that no objections were raised while M.C. Chandrasekaran was alive; he passed away in 1995. Additionally, they noted that M.C. Sivakami and M.C. Natarajan had reached adulthood in 1995 and 1999, respectively.Meanwhile, the plaintiffs have maintained that the Kapoor family has neither the legal nor moral authority to call them illegitimate or question their parents’ relationship. They claim that the 1988 sale deeds themselves were invalid and have accused the family of fraudulently obtaining a ‘patta’—a revenue record that establishes land ownership, for the property in 2023.The plaintiffs further stated that they only discovered the property and the alleged “illegal transactions” linked to it in 2023, after which they filed the case in 2025. After hearing both sides, the additional district court on December 1, 2025 refused to dismiss the plea filed by Boney Kapoor and his family, stating that the issue required a full trial. This decision prompted the Kapoor family to approach the Madras High Court through the present civil revision petition.
