The recent statement by Bollywood actress, Sonali Bendre, and her producer husband, Goldie Behl, has sparked controversy regarding allegations made by a farmer residing in Pune, Maharashtra. The case has been taken to court to settle the legal disagreement regarding a piece of property located in Pune that has allegedly been illegally obtained by the couple.
India – Farmer Asks Court To Stop Sonali Bendre’s Alleged Land Grab
A Pune area farmer, Chandrakant Shinde, filed a case with the civil court in Vadgaon, Maval district of Pune to seek legal recourse against the couple for their alleged illegal acquisition of nearly 30 gunthas of land (approximately 32,000 square feet) at Uksan village in the Maval area of Pune.
As part of the complaint, the Shinde family asserts that they have had ancestral or tenancy rights to the property since before 1957, and that the couple purchased land despite the Shinde family legal rights to ownership of the land.
As part of the petition, Mr. Shinde is requesting the civil court issue a stay order on the property, and that the court issue him legal protection from any further activity that may take place on the property before the civil court case has been resolved.
read more: Radhika Merchant flaunts Rs 25 Crore pink watch
Allegations of Intimidation and Illegal Construction
The farmer has charged them with illegal acquisition, along with intimidation and improper use of influence. It is claimed that they were attempting construction on a portion of the land without authorization. The family was also threatened when they resisted.
Additionally, there are reports that the family experienced “mafia” style pressure and that the police showed bias in their handling of the situation.
As part of the dispute, the farmer has alleged that his family’s names were taken off the land records without due process.
read more: Miss Grand Thailand’s viral rain dance compared to Katrina
Family, legal history and ownership dispute
There appears to be a complex ownership history of the land. According to the complaint, over the years, the land changed hands on multiple occasions, with Goldie Behl acquiring a portion of the land in recent years.
However, the complainant alleges that the specific transactions are invalid because legally, his family’s right to tenancy was never terminated. The matter is now a civil dispute, and the court will address competing ownership claims and documentation.
Sonali Bendre has categorically denied the allegations and has labeled them “unfounded” and an effort to extort money from her. She asserted that her name does not appear.
Her legal team has reiterated that she has no direct involvement in the land transaction and dismissed the accusations as unfounded. According to her lawyer, the complainant had previously approached administrative authorities, but those appeals were unsuccessful.
read more: Bhumi Pednekar talks about weight and health
Court Proceedings and Next Hearing
The legal representatives of the complainant have disputed the allegations against the complainant and asserted that they were grossly unfair. The attorney for the complainant stated that the complainant had filed earlier complaints regarding the subject matter of these proceedings with the appropriate administrative agencies, which found that those complaints were unfounded.
The civil action at bar relates to a dispute between the complainant and four interested parties that include Sonali Bendre, Goldie Behl, and two others, and is pending in the Vadgaon-Maval District Court, with a court date currently scheduled for later this month.
A developing legal battle
The primary focus of the court in its review of the case will be the examination of the records of the land in question, evaluation of historical tenancy claims, and analysis of prior transactions involving the subject properties based on contracts of sale, deeds of conveyance, and mortgage documents.
The case highlights the legal complexities associated with ownership disputes in India and the various types of claims (historical tenancy rights versus multiple transactions occurring over a long time) which are typically present. Given the stark differences between the parties’ respective assertions, the ultimate outcome of the case will depend heavily upon the credibility of the evidence and documentation that each party submits to the court.
At this time, the complainant has not proven her allegations and the case is presently sub judice, and the case will resolve the veracity of the parties’ respective claims.
