Shilpa, Shamita and their mother dragged to court by her late father’s lender over Rs 21 lakhs; actress says wasn’t involved in father’s business

By Vandana Srivastawa

on January 23, 2019

Shilpa Shetty, her younger sister Shamita Shetty and mother Sunanda Shetty have been dragged to court by an automobile agency proprietor who claims that her late father had borrowed Rs 21 lakhs in 2015 and was supposed to pay the amount with interest in January 2017. Parhad Amra claims that he shared cordial relations with Shilpa’s father and hence the former provided financial help to Surendra Shetty for his business. However, following his demise, Amra’s loan was not repaid. Shilpa and her family has denied the allegations and will be up for a court hearing on the case on January 29 at the Metropolitan Magistrate Court.

As per a leading daily, Amra paid the first installment of Rs 8 lakh on August 20, 2015, from his automobile agency account and then the second one of Rs 5 lakh on September 5, 2015, and the third one of Rs 8 lakh on October 7, 2015. All payments were made from his personal account and his automobile agency’s account to Surendra’s film ‘Corgifts’. The financial aids were provided by cheques drawn in favour of the company’s account. Parhad further claimed that he was told that Sunanda and his two actress daughters were partners in the firm.

[caption id="attachment_201135" align="aligncenter" width="681"] File Photo of Shilpa Shetty and Shamita Shetty with their parents Sunanda Shetty and Surendra Shetty[/caption]

However, Shilpa has denied such claims and told the daily, “I have never had any involvement in my late father's business, and have no knowledge at all of the financial dealings of the company. This gentleman is misleading the media. I knew him in the capacity of our family car mechanic that's all."

Parhad claims that the Shettys knew about the financial transaction and before the set date of the repayment of the loan, Surendra passed away in October 2016. He said, “Sunanda and her daughters denied that the loan was ever advanced, and refused to repay the amount.” Now the matter is under the court’s jurisdiction and it will be solved only after the judiciary comes to a decision.