The Mysterious Case of Four Radhas Claiming Bengaluru Property
A prime 12-acre property valued at over ₹20 crore in Bandapura village near Hoskote on Bengaluru's eastern fringe has become the center of an extraordinary legal battle involving four women with the same name - Radha - all claiming to be the wife of the original owner who died nearly four decades ago.
The property originally belonged to S Krishnan, who purchased the land through a registered sale deed dated October 6, 1978, and died on May 29, 1986. What should have been a straightforward inheritance case has transformed into a complex web of claims, counter-claims, and allegations of document forgery that has now reached the Karnataka High Court.
The Four Claimants and Their Conflicting Stories
The first claimant is a 65-year-old woman from Tamil Nadu who identifies herself as Radha. According to her police complaint filed through a general power of attorney, she was the only wife of Krishnan and the absolute owner of the land. She claims that after her husband's death, her name was entered in the revenue records since they had no children, and she maintained possession of the property.
"After my husband's death, I was living in Tamil Nadu and visited Bengaluru for my work. In recent days, when I visited the property in Bengaluru, I was shocked to find that someone else had occupied my land," states the FIR dated October 22, quoting Radha's complaint.
The second claimant is Radha R, who allegedly claimed to be Krishnan's wife and transferred the land to her four children through a gift deed in March 2023. Her children subsequently signed a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) with real estate firm Sattva Resi Pvt Ltd on August 14, 2023.
The third group involves Lingaraja and others who staked claim to the property asserting that it was given to them under a will dated December 14, 2022, executed by "one Radha" claiming to be Krishnan's wife. This group is alleged to have claimed compensation of over ₹11 lakh from the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for land acquisition by impersonating as the landowner.
The fourth group comprising Venkata Rama Naidu Kola and others have also used the name of Radha to register the same property in their names, according to the FIR.
Legal Complications and Police Involvement
The case took a dramatic turn when Ashwin Sancheti, a senior executive of Sattva Group who signed the JDA, was arrested and later released on bail. The police registered an FIR at Avalahalli police station based on the complaint filed by the Radha from Tamil Nadu.
In her complaint, she alleged that "these three groups of accused persons, with the intention of making illegal profits, have fabricated documents and registered claims on the property as their own. They have illegally entered my property and are posing a threat. They have not only cheated me but also the courts."
The legal heirs of Radha R, who are currently in possession of the land, had also filed a police complaint in 2023 regarding the alleged impersonation of Radha by the third group.
Court Proceedings and Real Estate Firm's Stance
The matter has now reached the Karnataka High Court, with Ashwin Sancheti and other accused seeking quashing of the FIR registered on October 22. The court has stayed further investigations against one of the accused, Venkata Rama Naidu Kola, until November 24.
The High Court noted arguments that the dispute is purely civil in nature with pending suits, and that the complaint was lodged by a power of attorney holder, which may not be permissible.
Sattva Group, a major Bengaluru real estate firm, has strongly denied any involvement in illegal activities. The company stated that it entered into the JDA with "Smt. R. Radha and her four children, the legal heirs of the late Shri S. Krishnan" for developing the 12-acre land parcel.
The company emphasized that it "follows all legal requirements and established business processes" while denying "any involvement in illegal activities such as impersonation or document fabrication." They have called the allegations against Sancheti and the company baseless and contradictory to facts.
The case is likely to be heard in the second week of December, while a district court had earlier noted that the dispute centers around the "triangle claim of the marital status" of the different women named Radha.
