Ranbir Kapoor, who’s enjoying the limelight for his perfomance in Sanju, has been sued by the tenant of his plush apartment that he had leased out in Pune. He has been sued for allegedly not honouring the terms of the rental agreement.


Sheetal Surywanshi, who had moved into the 6,094 square-feet apartment located in Trump Towers in Pune’s Kalyani Nagar after renting it on leave and license basis, has sought damages and interest for being evicted much before the lock-in period stated in the agreement. As was discussed, the license fee to be paid was Rs 4 lakh per month for the first 12 months, and Rs 4.20 lakhs for the next 12. Over and above Suryawanshi had to pay a deposit of Rs 24 lakh.

Ranbir Kapoor Faces Legal Trouble, Gets Sued For Rs. 50 Lakh
Ranbir Kapoor Faces Legal Trouble, Gets Sued For Rs. 50 Lakh

The case is ongoing in Pune civil court where Suryawanshi has sought damages to an amount of Rs 50.40 lakh and interest of Rs 1.08 lakh alleging her family suffered ‘severe inconvenience and hardships’ due to the sudden eviction. She also informs that in August 2017, 11 months after she moved in, she was asked to vacate the flat. She eventually moved out by October-end 2017.


As per the suit filed earlier this year, ‘24-months shall be a lock-in period’ was the arrangement in the agreement signed between the two sides. “In said notice (email), it was falsely informed by the defendant (Ranbir) that he wants to shift into the said premises, and for this reason, plaintiff (Suryawanshi) was asked to vacate the premises in contravention of the terms and conditions of the leave and license agreement,” the suit stated to Mumbai Mirror. Suryawanshi also alleged that she was ‘maliciously deceived’ by Ranbir to vacate despite the lock-in period of 24 months. According to reports, the suit informs that in January 2018, Suryawanshi shot a notice to the actor but did not get any response.

However, Ranbir has denied all allegations and has filed his responses in the court, stating that Suryawanshi was not asked to vacate the flat because he was moving in, reproducing a portion of the leave and license agreement. The clause in the agreement states that the lock-in period would be of 12 months and that the licensee (Suryawanshi) cannot terminate it before said period. The portion reproduced in the response also states that if Suryawanshi terminates the agreement before 12 months, she will be liable to pay the rent for the remaining period.

“Plaintiff cannot unilaterally change, modify or interpret leave and license agreement to suit her convenience,” Ranbir’s response stated as per a report by Mumbai Mirror, adding that Suryawanshi vacated the flat on her own free will and that she defaulted on rent for 3 months before leaving which has been deducted from the deposit.

The case is now scheduled to be heard next on August 28.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Check This Out