Amitabh Bachchan faces legal dispute over Jalsa as sister-in-law challenges 1993 deed

A family property dispute has emerged over Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan's Juhu bungalow, Jalsa. His sister-in-law, Ramola Bachchan, has reportedly challenged a 1993 gift deed that transferred ownership of the property to Jaya Bachchan, claiming the transaction took place without her knowledge or consent.

The complaint has reached the office of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies in Andheri, where a hearing has been initiated. The dispute comes as Jalsa remains the venue for Bachchan's regular interactions with fans, including his long-running 'Sunday Darshan'.

According to Mumbai Mirror, Ramola, who is married to Amitabh's younger brother Ajitabh Bachchan, has filed multiple complaints with the registration authorities over the past seven months. She has claimed that Jalsa was originally registered in her name before its ownership was transferred to Jaya through the gift deed.

Records maintained by the Kapol Housing Society reportedly identify Jaya Bachchan as the owner. However, the Maharashtra government's Property Card



continues to carry Ramola's name. The dispute reportedly resurfaced after attempts were made to replace her name with Jaya's in the government records.

Ramola has also questioned how the 1993 document was executed. According to her complaints, the gift deed was prepared on plain paper without the payment of stamp duty at the time. She has also alleged that it did not carry the signatures of witnesses.

She has further questioned the document's subsequent registration and regularisation under the Maharashtra government's Abhay Yojana scheme.

Deputy Registrar Faiyaz Mulani confirmed that the complaint had been received and said a hearing had begun. The parties concerned have been asked to submit their responses.

Amitabh Bachchan reportedly did not respond to queries, while Jaya Bachchan could not be reached. A spokesperson for Abhishek Bachchan declined to comment and described the dispute as an internal family matter. The authorities have yet to determine the validity of the disputed documents and ownership claims.