The Madras High Court recently rejected a civil suit filed by three persons against Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor, staking rights in Chennai property purchased in the name of the late actress Sridevi in 1988. The court noted that the suit was filed almost 40 years after the sales deed and was thus barred by limitation.
Madras High Court rejects suit against Boney, Janhvi and Khushi Kapoor
According to Bar and Bench, Justice TV Thamilselvi allowed a civil revision petition to be filed by Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor to set aside a Chengalpattu court`s refusal to reject the complaint filed by MC Sivakami, MC Natarajan and Chandrabhanu.
The High Court noted that the suit, filed by MC Sivakami, MC Natarajan and Chandrabhanu, was filed nearly 40 years after the 1988 sale deeds. And was therefore barred by limitation. The High Court further ruled that the plaintiff had no locus standi to maintain the said case.
The court noted that the plaintiffs had not revealed in the plaint that Chandrasekaran’s first wife, Banumathi, was alive at the time of his death. The Court found that although the plaintiffs claimed to be the only legal heirs of Chandrasekaran on the basis of a legal heir certificate issued in 2005, the certificate had since been cancelled. “So, the legitimate claim made by the plaintiffs is that they are legal heirs of deceased Chandrasekaran is also not sustainable in law,” the Court noted.
On this limitation, the Court rejected the plaintiffs’ claim that they realised about the purchase in Sridevi’s name only in 2023. “Furthermore, it is totally unbelievable that they came to know about the said purchase in the name of Sreedevi only in the year 2023,” the Court said.
The Court also noted that the sale deeds had been in favour of Sridevi from 1988 and following her death, Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor became the lawful owners of the property. The High Court concluded that the suit against the Kapoors was a bothersome claim and called it an abuse of process.
“Only to grab the property, with vexatious claim, by abusing the process of law, they came forward with the present suit for the relief of partition,” the Court said.
About the case
The dispute was regarding 2.70 acres of land at Sholinganallur in Chennai. The plaintiffs, MC Sivakami, MC Natarajan and Chandrabhanu, claimed that they were the legal heirs of the late MC Chandrasekaran and thus sought the partition of the property.
The complaint also sought declarations that the sale deeds executed in favour of Sridevi, her mother and sister were null and void. The plaintiffs claimed that the property originally belonged to MC Sambanda Mudaliar, who had purchased large extents of land at Sholinganallur in 1943 and that the 2.70 acres had been retained by him. They also alleged that the property later remained available for partition among his heirs.
Kapoor and his daughters had filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for a rejection of the plea. They argued that the complainants were not Class I legal heirs of MC Chandrasekaran and that their claim was barred by limitation.
They also told the court that Chandrasekaran himself had never challenged the 1988 sale deeds during his lifetime, pointing out that Chandrasekaran died in 1995, while the suit was filed only in 2025.
The trial court had, however, dismissed the application filed by the Kapoors to dismiss the civil suit, stating that the disputed questions would have to be decided at trial. Now the High Court has disagreed.