Sridevi's Chennai Property Sparks Intense Legal Battle as Kapoor Family Seeks Justice
The late legendary actress Sridevi's property located on Chennai's East Coast Road (ECR) has become the epicenter of a protracted legal conflict that has persisted for nearly a year. Recent developments reveal that her husband, renowned film producer Boney Kapoor, alongside their daughters Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor, have escalated the matter by approaching the Madras High Court. This move follows a decision by an additional district court in Chengalpattu, which declined to dismiss a civil suit concerning a 4.7-acre parcel of land originally purchased by Sridevi.
Origins and Timeline of the Dispute
The roots of this contentious issue trace back to 2025, when Boney Kapoor first initiated legal proceedings by alleging that three individuals had unlawfully staked claims to the property. Since that initial filing, the case has remained under active judicial scrutiny, with both sides presenting compelling arguments. According to a report from The Hindu, on Monday, March 16, Justice TV Thamilselvi agreed to hear the Kapoor family's petition on March 26. Additionally, the judge extended an interim order that temporarily suspends trial proceedings, providing a brief respite in the ongoing legal tussle.
Key Claims and Counterarguments
The plaintiffs in this case are identified as MC Sivakami, her sister MC Natarajan, and their mother Chandrabhanu. They assert rights over a portion of the land owned by Sridevi and have sought to nullify four sale deeds through which the actress and her sister acquired the 4.7-acre property in 1988. In response, Boney Kapoor has vehemently defended the family's ownership, stating in court documents from 2025 that Sridevi purchased the land in 1988. He elaborated that the property originally belonged to M.C. Sambanda Mudaliar, who had three sons and two daughters, with the land being divided among family members in 1960.
The Kapoor family's petition raises critical legal points regarding the plaintiffs' claims. They contend that Chandrabhanu's marriage to M.C. Chandrasekaran, who is cited as the original owner of the property, occurred while his first marriage to M.C. Banumathi was still legally valid. Under laws prohibiting bigamy, this second union is argued to be void. The family alleges that this pivotal detail was deliberately concealed by the plaintiffs, stating, "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." They further emphasized that Chandrabhanu was fully aware of the circumstances surrounding her marriage on February 5, 1975.
Duration and Timing of the Lawsuit
Adding to their defense, the Kapoor family highlighted that they have held the property for nearly 38 years without any prior disputes. They questioned the timing of the lawsuit, noting how a case seeking to cancel sale deeds executed in 1988 could be filed only in 2025. Moreover, they pointed out that no objections were raised during the lifetime of M.C. Chandrasekaran, who passed away in 1995, and that MC Sivakami and MC Natarajan reached adulthood in 1995 and 1999, respectively, yet took no legal action until recently.
Plaintiffs' Allegations and Counterclaims
On the other side, the plaintiffs have firmly maintained that the Kapoor family lacks both legal and moral authority to label them as illegitimate or to question their parents' relationship. They argue that the 1988 sale deeds are themselves invalid and have accused the family of fraudulently obtaining a 'patta'—a crucial revenue record establishing land ownership—for the property in 2023. According to their statements, they only became aware of the property and the alleged "illegal transactions" associated with it in 2023, prompting them to file the case in 2025.
Judicial Proceedings and Future Outlook
After considering arguments from both parties, the additional district court on December 1, 2025, refused to dismiss the plea filed by Boney Kapoor and his family. The court ruled that the issue necessitates a full trial to thoroughly examine all evidence and legal nuances. This decision ultimately led the Kapoor family to file a civil revision petition with the Madras High Court, seeking to overturn the lower court's ruling and secure a favorable outcome. As the case progresses, it underscores the complexities of property disputes involving high-profile figures and the intricate legal frameworks governing land ownership in India.
