17 September,2026 11:53 AM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
Khushi, Janhvi and Boney Kapoor. Pic via X
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, issued notices to film producer Boney Kapoor as well as his daughters Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor in a property dispute. The notices were issued based on a plea seeking to revive a 2.70-acre parcel of land in Chennai purchased by late actress Sridevi and her family.
According to Bar and Bench, Justices K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Pillai issued notice on the petition filed by M.C. Sivakami and her brother M.C. Natarajan. The petitioners have claimed a share in the disputed property reportedly purchased by Sridevi. The notice directed the parties involved to maintain status quo till the next date of hearing.
The Bench also stated that the parties should explore an amicable resolution through mediation, adding that a retired High Court judge would be appointed as mediator. Subsequently, the matter has been posted for December 18 to consider the progress of the mediation.
Notably, the petitioners have challenged the April 20 order of the Madras High Court. The HC order allowed a revision petition filed by Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor while rejecting the civil suit initiated by Sivakami and others.
The High Court, in its order, had held that the suit seeking to challenge the 1988 sale transactions was barred by limitation. It added that the plaintiffs had not established a legally sustainable claim.
During the hearing before the Supreme Court, the petitioners' counsel argued that the High Court had gone into questions over the claimants' legal-heir status. It also questioned the validity of Chandrasekaran's alleged second marriage to decide if the petition was liable to be rejected.
Appearing for the Kapoors, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi stated that the sale transaction dates back to April 19, 1988, while the current suit was instituted only in 2025. Singhvi also contended that the petitioners had attained majority in 1995 and 1999.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court sought clarification on whether M.C. Chandrasekaran had a 1/5th share in the property and if there was any conflict about the petitioners being his children.
The dispute revolves around 2.70 acres of land in Survey No. 1/1B at Sholinganallur in Chennai. As per the Madras High Court pleadings, the plaintiffs claimed to be legal heirs of late M.C. Chandrasekaran and thus sought partition of the property into five equal shares.
They also sought declarations that the sale deeds dated April 19, 1988, and the subsequent transactions concerning the property were null and void.
