Rules against its previous order preventing Shweta Shetty from doing so, noting a fact that was deliberately hidden from it, and which if it had known, would have impacted the case differently
Shweta Shetty
Pop singer Shweta Shetty has been granted a significant reprieve, as the Bombay High Court reversed its previous decision, which prohibited her from entering the SoBo house of her 95-year-old father, Mahalaba Rampa Shetty. The court has cited that the singer’s father had registered a gift deed in favour of his three daughters, except Shetty, and this fact was deliberately kept hidden from it. “What has been done is fraud on the Court and a fraud on the statute,” the court stated setting aside its previous order.
New information that emerged after November 2021 is that her father had registered a gift deed in favour of her three sisters on August 5, 2021. Shetty, a German citizen with Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) status, claimed that her siblings manipulated their father into making this decision, as he is 95 years old and has difficulty understanding things due to his health. Shetty told mid-day that false allegations were levelled against her, and her siblings conspired against her with evil intentions, and filed a false complaint against her that resulted in the previous tribunal order, and fraud was committed in court.
ADVERTISEMENT
‘I respect courts’ orders’
“I cannot begin to describe the trauma I have gone through when I was accused of harassing my 95-year-old father to get a share in his property. All my sisters ganged up against me, dragged me into court and then shamed me in public through media reports. When I returned from Germany, my sisters never allowed me to enter my father’s house, and I had to call my friends to ask if I could stay with them for a few days during the pandemic,” Shetty told mid-day.
Also Read: Mumbai Crime: Bhojpuri actress gets arrested for allegedly running prostitution racket
“I have always had faith in our judicial system and respected the orders of the courts. Today, justice has prevailed,” she added.
The original order was issued by the Welfare Tribunal and Deputy Collector under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007, following allegations by her father that Shetty was harassing him to acquire a share of his property.
The tribunal’s decision was made on November 27, 2020, and Shetty subsequently filed an appeal with the Bombay High Court. However, the court upheld the order of the tribunal court on November 25, 2021, a Division Bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar ruled that Shetty has no right to claim a share of her father’s property while he is still alive.
The same bench of the Bombay High Court has now reversed its previous decision based on new information withheld by Shetty’s father and her three sisters. Shetty alleges that her sisters turned their father against her, though he wanted her to live with him. Shetty has been living apart from her father since then.
The HC order
Shetty, through her lawyer Manoj Agiwal filed a review petition before the court, August 22, 2022 and disclosed the fact. The same bench of the Bombay High Court in its order said, “A review is sought, and in our view correctly, of our order of 25th November 2021. That was a detailed judgment by which we held against the Petitioner, Shweta, the daughter of the 2nd Respondent, her widowed father.
The representation to us at that time was that the 2nd Respondent (Father) was the sole and absolute owner of the residential flat in question, Flat No. 2A, Giriraj Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, 11 Altamont Road, Mumbai (sic).”
“What was not disclosed to us was that the factual position had changed (and changed drastically) by the time of our judgment,” the court has noted. (sic)
The court has stated that it was not previously aware that on August 5, 2021, after the challenged order was issued and after the writ petition was filed, the second respondent (Shetty’s father) gifted the flat to his other daughters, resulting in transfer of ownership. Therefore, at the time of the court’s November 25, 2021 order, the father was no longer the sole or absolute owner of the flat.
He had relinquished all rights and interests in the property through the gift deed.
The court further said that if these facts had been disclosed, it would have significantly impacted the outcome of the case. The court ruled that its November 25, 2021 order was obtained based on false and inaccurate information presented to it, which was known to the father and possibly the other daughters who are parties to the case.
95
Age of Shweta Shetty’s father
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
