The Kalamkar

Property Dispute: 2 claimants to one property, lawsuit lasted for 40 years, now a big decision of the Supreme Court

An elderly woman wrote a will and left her property in the name of her only grandson. After his death suddenly another claimant to the property came. The lower court also gave its verdict in favor of the man who described himself as the 'adopted son' of the woman. Finally, after 40 years, the grandson got the rights on that property from the Supreme Court. Let us know about it in detail.

supreme court newss

The Kalamkar News (New Delhi). The only grandson of an elderly woman from Andhra Pradesh had to fight a 4 decade long legal battle to get his rights over his grandmother's property. His entire youth was spent in making rounds of the courts. Ultimately he won and the 'allegedly adopted' son of the elderly woman failed to grab the property. Interestingly, hair dye played a big role in deciding this case. 

The young man spent 17 years in litigation in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, while 16 years were spent in the Supreme Court. In the same Supreme Court which continuously says that timely justice is a part of the fundamental right to life. 

In this case, there were two claimants to the property of the elderly woman. Both of them made claim on the basis of will. One is the woman's only grandson and the other is the woman's allegedly adopted son.

what is the matter

An elderly woman named Venkubayamma wrote a will in May 1981 and transferred her property in a town in Odisha to her only grandson Kaliprasad. In February 1982, the woman married her grandson. Just five months later, in July 1982, the woman died.

After Venkuyamma's death, a person suddenly came on the scene and the matter of claim on the woman's property reached the court. The man claimed that he was his adopted son. 

Not only this, he claimed that the woman had also bequeathed the property in his name and had canceled the will made in the name of the grandson. The man also produced documents of adoption in April 1982 and a will in May 1982.

Trial court gave verdict against grandson, High Court overturned it

The trial court ruled in favor of the woman's allegedly adopted 'son' in 1989. Kaliprasad challenged this in the High Court. In 2006, the High Court overturned the lower court's decision and ruled in favor of the woman's grandson. After this, in January 2008, the 'adopted son' appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court's decision. In 2010, the apex court accepted the appeal.

Hair dye turned milk into milk and water into water.

In the Supreme Court, the 'adopted son' presented photographs of the alleged adoption ceremony held on April 18, 1982, in which a 70-year-old woman was seen with black hair.

The bench of Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar questioned whether a woman living in a remote area would have dyed her hair in 1982. After this question, the fraud of the allegedly adopted son started getting exposed one by one. He had hatched a fraudulent scheme to deprive the woman's grandson of legitimate inheritance of the property and usurp it himself.

Questions raised due to hair dye and lies revealed layer by layer

The Supreme Court's second doubt was that the 'adopted son' failed to explain what happened between May 1981 and April 1982 that allegedly led to the deterioration of the relationship between the elderly woman and her grandson. 

It got so bad that the woman allegedly evicted him from her property. The Supreme Court expressed doubt that a professional photographer was called for the alleged adoption ceremony but why did he take only 3 photographs?