Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor, Khushi Kapoor move to Madras HC over Sridevi's Chennai property: Report
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.Get the latest entertainment updates from the Times of India, along with the latest Hindi movies, upcoming Hindi movies in 2026 , and Telugu movies.”
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.
Top Comment
Y
Yezdi Vesuna
56 minutes ago
THEY KILLED HER FOR MONEY AND NOW PROPERTYRead allPost comment
end of article
Featured in Entertainment
- Antony Varghese's 'fanboy moment' with Suriya
- Adrian Grenier sets condition for acting comeback
- Teyana Taylor addresses Oscars 2026 backstage clash
- 'Dhurandhar 2' gets 24 hour shows, post-midnight shows due to heavy demand
- Who is Navnindra Behl? All you need to know about the actress
- BTS: The Return: when and where to watch in India on OTT
Trending Stories
- Ugadi Pachadi Recipe: How to make traditional Telugu New Year dish and its importance
- When is Eid-ul-Fitr 2026? Key dates, historical context and significance explained
- Ugadi 2026: Step-by-step rituals and traditions to follow on Telugu New Year for a prosperous and happy year ahead
- Celina Jaitly reacts as brother refuses to contact, wants to consult wife; court dismisses plea
- No LPG? No Problem: 8 breakfast dishes you can make in an electric kettle
- LPG crisis hits IT firms as Infosys, TCS, Cognizant, and Wipro cut canteen services and ask employees to ‘pack lunch boxes from home’
- 'Kochadaiiyaan' Cheque Bounce Case: HC warns Murali Manohar over Rs 2.27cr dues
- ‘Everything is connected’: Man draws mysterious ‘cosmic map’ after near-death experience, drawing goes viral
- 7 foods you should never eat without soaking and why
- 8 Indian breakfasts with more protein than eggs
Photostories
- Inside Rashmika Mandanna and Vijay Deverakonda’s 'Haldi + Holi' ceremony: From boat entries to floral kurtas
- 5 meanings behind lighting a diya during prayer
- ‘The Odyssey,’ 'Project Hail Mary,’ and ‘Dune 3’: Oscar 2027's early and likely contenders to watch
- Delhi’s big road push: New corridors, flyovers, free rides and more
- From a luxurious house worth crores to expensive shoes and watch collection- Mr Faisu’s lavish lifestyle and house tour
- 8 epic mountain drives in India perfect for summer travel
- Mumbai Metro 3 boost: BMC to draft local area plans for 27 station zones by 2028
- 'Dhurandhar 2: The Revenge' to 'Lagaan': Top 5 Indian films with the longest theatrical runtime
- Deadly on-camera stunt: Delhi property dealer fires gun at chest and dies
- 7 discontinued cars enthusiasts still miss today
Up Next