Sridevi Property Dispute: SC Notice To Boney Kapoor, Janhvi And Khushi Over Chennai Land

The Sridevi property dispute has returned to the Supreme Court nearly four decades after the original land transactions. The apex court has issued notices to Boney Kapoor, Janhvi Kapoor and Khushi Kapoor over a disputed 2.70 acre portion of a larger Chennai property linked to late actress Sridevi, ordered the parties to maintain status quo and suggested mediation. The next hearing is scheduled for December 18, 2026.

A bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and Arun Pillai was hearing a petition filed by M C Sivakami and M C Natarajan, along with their mother Chandrabhanu, challenging an April 20, 2026 Madras High Court order. The petitioners claim rights over the property and have sought to revive their civil suit after the High Court rejected it.

The property is located in Sholinganallur, Chennai, near the East Coast Road. Reports have described the overall property as around 4.7 acres, while the portion specifically involved in the present legal dispute is about 2.70 acres. The land was acquired through four sale deeds executed on April 19, 1988, in favour of Sridevi, her mother Rajeshwari and her sister Sreelatha.

The petitioners claim that the land formed part of property originally acquired by their ancestor M C Samband Mudaliar in 1943. They say they are legal heirs of M C Chandrasekaran and have sought partition, claiming a one fifth share. They have also challenged the validity of the 1988 sale deeds and subsequent transactions involving the land.

The dispute resurfaced after Sridevi's death in 2018. In 2023, revenue records relating to the property were reportedly changed to include the names of Boney Kapoor and their daughters Janhvi and Khushi. The Kapoor family has also been reported to have a farmhouse on the property.

The legal battle first reached a civil court in Chengalpattu. The trial court initially declined to reject the plaintiffs' case at the preliminary stage. The Madras High Court later overturned that decision in April 2026 and rejected the suit, holding that the challenge to transactions dating back to 1988 was barred by limitation. The High Court also questioned the petitioners' claim that they became aware of the transactions only in 2023.

During the Supreme Court hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the Kapoor family, highlighted the nearly four decade gap between the 1988 sale deeds and the suit filed in 2025. He also pointed to the ages of the claimants, arguing that some had attained adulthood much earlier. The Supreme Court, meanwhile, sought clarification on questions including whether M C Chandrasekaran actually held a one fifth share in the disputed property.

The Supreme Court has now proposed mediation, with a retired High Court judge expected to oversee the process. Until further orders, the parties must maintain status quo, including restrictions concerning transfer, construction and possession of the disputed property.