Comedian Goundamani's property case, which has been ongoing for the past 20 years, has now been ruled in his favor.

Goundamani is a leading comedy actor in tamil cinema. In the 90s, he earned a salary equal to that of heroes. In 1996, he borrowed 5 ground and 454 square feet of land from nalini Bai on Kodambakkam Arcot road and planned to build a commercial complex there.

According to this, the site was given to a construction company called Shree Abirami Foundation and it is said that they paid 3.58 crore rupees with the condition that a commercial complex with an area of 22,700 square feet should be completed and handed over in 15 months.

While the company was constantly delaying, the construction work was not completed. Similarly, in 2004, the work was completely abandoned. It is also said that when the Goundamani asked for this, the construction company forcibly entered the premises and stationed some servants there and tried to take over the place. Following this, a civil case was filed in the high court in 2006 against the construction company and the people who were suspended there, from the side of the county, which demanded the recovery of the property.

When the case came up for hearing before Justice Krishnan Ramasamy, the construction company could ask for it only if the construction work was completed and the money was not paid. Therefore, he ordered that the five-ground 456 square feet land on which actor Goundamani was located should be handed over to him again, and from august 2008, he should be paid one lakh rupees per month to Goundamani.

Challenging the judge's decision, the construction company appealed again in the madras high court in 2021. A two-judge bench heard the appeal and held that the company could not legally hold the property and had no right to continue to hold it as it did not complete the construction work even after receiving payment from Goundamani.

Likewise, the two judges affirmed the order of the single judge and held that since the company was not the owner of the property, the company had no right to keep the documents of the property and the order to recover the countamani documents was not wrong...not illegal.. And the madras high court held that the construction company should be held liable to compensate the actor for occupying the property without legal right. It is noteworthy that this property problem that has been going on for the past 20 years has been resolved