Posted by Fenil Seta
Vijayta Pandit claims Moti Sagar, son of filmmaker Ramanand Sagar, owes her Rs 1.65 cr. Sagar denies charge. Says bungalow deal fell through and it is the actress’s family that owes him money
Nazia Sayed (MUMBAI MIRROR; April 27, 2017)
Actress Vijayta Pandit, widow of music composer Aadesh Shrivastava, has threatened to drag Moti Sagar, son of legendary filmmaker Ramanand Sagar, to court over Rs 1.65 crore she claims he owes her.
A legal notice sent by the actress through Ameet Mehta of Solicis Lex says that Rs 1.65 crore was the token amount paid by Shrivastava to Sagar for a Lokhandwala bungalow in February 2015. But since the sale was never executed and the bungalow has since been sold to someone else, Vijayta Pandit must get the money back.
Sagar, however, denies he owes anything to Vijayta Pandit and claims that her late husband had, in fact, borrowed Rs 2.28 crore from him. “Not only do I not owe them anything, I will be soon filing a case to recover the money that is due to me,” he said.
Vijayta Pandit, who lost her husband in September 2015, has denied Sagar’s allegations, claiming that he has been dilly-dallying over returning the money from the time Aadesh was alive. “He stopped taking my calls after my husband passed away. I have gone to his office and sat there for hours, but every time returned without meeting him. This is my husband’s hard-earned money, and I will fight for it,” she said.
While the actress claims Sagar is offering her land in Baroda for the money, the latter said the land in Baroda was part of the original deal and it has already been transferred in Aadesh Shrivastava’s name. “I do not owe a penny to the family,” he said.
Vijayta Pandit says she has no use for the land because a part of it belongs to somebody else and she can’t sell it without the other party’s consent.
“I need the money. I am not earning and I have to support my two kids,” she said.
Sagar claims that Aadesh was aware of the Baroda land’s status when the deal was signed. “He knew there was another party involved. If the family is facing problems selling it, it is their problem. I should not be held responsible for it,” he said.