Sivaji Ganesan’s bungalow row: Madras High Court lifts attachment order

The Madras High Court on Monday (April 21, 2025) raised an attachment order passed with respect to thespian ‘Sivaji’ Ganesan alias V.C. Ganesan’s bungalow named ‘Annai Illam’ at T. Nagar in Chennai, due to a loan dispute involving his grandson R.G. Dusshyanth, son of G. Ramkumar, and his wife Abirami Dusshyanth.

The Madras High Court on Monday (April 21, 2025) raised an attachment order passed with respect to thespian ‘Sivaji’ Ganesan alias V.C. Ganesan’s bungalow named ‘Annai Illam’ at T. Nagar in Chennai, due to a loan dispute involving his grandson R.G. Dusshyanth, son of G. Ramkumar, and his wife Abirami Dusshyanth.

Justice Abdul Quddhose raised the attachment order after the thespian’s younger son G. Prabhu filed an application stating that he was now the sole owner of the entire bungalow, spread over 53,240 sq.ft., and that neither his elder brother Mr. Ramkumar nor other siblings had any right whatsoever over the property.

The judge agreed with the submissions of senior counsel P.R. Raman, assisted by Sakthi Aatharsh, representing Mr. Prabhu, and directed the T. Nagar Sub-Registrar to remove all entries made in the encumbrance certificate related to the property, pursuant to the attachment order passed in February this year.

A private firm named Dhanabakkiam Enterprises, represented by its partner Akshay Sarin, had approached the High Court, demanding ₹9.39 crore (including the principal amount of ₹3.74 crore, along with 30% interest, working out to over ₹5 crore till July 31, 2023) from Mr. Dusshyanth, his wife, and father.

The finance firm claimed that Mr. Ramkumar had also signed the agreement entered into between the private firm and Mr. Dusshyanth’s Eshan Productions in December 2017, for extending a loan to produce a movie titled Jagajaala Killadi, and therefore, the elder son’s share in Annai Illam must be attached to recover the loan.

The High Court had in February this year ordered the attachment of 13,310 sq. ft. out of the total extent of around 53,240 sq. ft of the property; Mr. Prabhu had immediately rushed to the court to raise the attachment.