MUMBAI: In reply to a private complaint made by Bollywood superstar Rajesh Khanna’s alleged live-in partner Anita Advani, Rajesh Khanna’s immediate family members are filing individual counter petitions.
Anita Advani recently filed a case under Section 19 of the Domestic Violence Act, alleging that Rajesh Khanna’s estranged wife Dimple Kapadia, daughters Twinkle and Rinke Khanna and son-in-law Akshay Kumar have evicted her from the Rajesh Khanna’s palatial bungalow on Carter Road in Bandra, Mumbai. The businesswoman from Bandra, Anita, has sought entry to the bungalow and is also asking for a monthly maintenance of Rs 10 lakh.
In her counter petition, Bollywood actress Dimple Kapadia has insisted that she was Rajesh Khanna’s legally wedded wife when he died and therefore no other woman could claim any rights to his legacy. Son-in-law Akshay Kumar has followed this up with a similar petition of his own and daughters Twinkle and Rinke Khanna will also follow suit.
To counter Anita Advani’s claims, Khanna’s family members petitions have heavily relied on the following aspects. The family has pointed that by Anita’s own admission, Rajesh Khanna had thrown her out of the bungalow on several occasions. So rather than filing a claim of domestic violence, why has she resorted to seek maintenance.
“The fact that she chose to move court nearly three months after Khanna’s death shows that her only intention is to grab property,” is what the family is saying and asking.
Additionally, according to the family, all of Anita’s descriptions of her relationship with Rajesh Khanna indicate that she was just a friend – whether it was encouraging Rajesh Khanna to repair and refurbish the bungalow ‘Aashirvad’ because it was in shambles, or the letter she wrote to the superstar just two days before he passed away. The family says that there is no indication of a serious relationship in that letter.
Regarding Anita’s allegations that the will was made by Khanna’s family when he was unfit to take any such decisions and therefore does not hold any water, the family has shown that the will was duly probated. The family does not wish to take the magistrate court’s suggestion to reach a settlement because they find that unreasonable. They are looking to get a stay on Anita’s claims till the matter is heard in High Court.