YS family property dispute escalates to National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

Vijayamma, Sharmila file counters

Taking aim at Jagan’s objections regarding the transfer of shares allegedly under the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) attachment, Vijayamma described the argument as politically motivated. She contended that the shares in Sandur Power were transferred to her prior to any ED attachment

The simmering dispute over the division of family assets within the YS family has intensified, reaching the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Chennai. The legal battle has now taken a sharper turn with Y.S. Vijayamma and Y.S. Sharmila filing detailed counter affidavits, firmly rejecting allegations and questioning the claims made by Andhra Pradesh former Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy.

In her counter affidavit submitted before the NCLAT bench, Vijayamma categorically denied accusations that she was acting as a proxy or representative for her daughter Sharmila. She asserted that she is acting independently and making decisions on her own accord. “I am not a benami for anyone,” she stated, dismissing claims suggesting otherwise.

Vijayamma further maintained that the gift deed executed in her favour by Jagan Mohan Reddy and his wife Y.S. Bharati Reddy was genuine and legally valid. She also clarified that the shares of Classic Realty Private Limited were acquired by her through due consideration, supported by valid agreements. According to her submission, once the share certificates and transfer documents were handed over, the role of the transferors in the company effectively ceased.

Taking aim at Jagan’s objections regarding the transfer of shares allegedly under the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) attachment, Vijayamma described the argument as politically motivated. She contended that the shares in Sandur Power were transferred to her prior to any ED attachment, questioning why objections were being raised now. She also pointed out that, as per a 2019 family arrangement, Saraswati Power Company was meant to be allocated to Sharmila. However, she said she retained control of certain assets to uphold the legacy and vision of her late husband, former Chief Minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy.

Meanwhile, Y.S. Sharmila, in her own counter affidavit, alleged that her name was being dragged into the dispute for political reasons. She expressed concern that what was originally a family understanding rooted in respecting her father’s legacy had now been turned into a contentious political issue.

After hearing preliminary arguments from both sides, the Chennai bench of the NCLAT has adjourned further proceedings in the case to April 29. The case is expected to have significant political and legal ramifications, given the high-profile individuals involved and the complex intersection of family arrangements, corporate ownership, and ongoing investigations.