SINGAPORE, May 13 — A 62-year-old woman who was evicted by her elderly mother from the family’s condominium unit has lost her lawsuit claiming a lifelong right to stay there rent-free.

Rita Kishinchand Bhojwani had lived under her parents’ roof for nearly three decades when she was forced out in 2021.

She sued her 91-year-old mother, Maya Kishinchand, along with the family’s real estate company HVS Properties and one of its directors, alleging that her eviction was unlawful and went against an “arrangement” that she could stay indefinitely.

But on January 28, 2025, the High Court dismissed her case, with Judicial Commissioner Christopher Tan later issuing written grounds stating that her account “lacked detail and credibility, and was internally inconsistent.”

“Once (the mother’s) evidence was baked into the mix and the plaintiff’s evidence scrutinised holistically, the cracks at the seams of the plaintiff’s case were highly visible,” said the judge in written grounds released on April 28, as reported by The Straits Times.

Bhojwani had subpoenaed her mother as her own witness — an unusual move the judge described as a “gamble.”

After Maya testified, the defendants opted not to present further evidence, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to establish a case requiring an answer.

The case came in the wake of Bhojwani’s legal actions against her elder brother Sunil over their father’s finances and a failed bid to obtain a personal protection order against him.

Her mother opposed these moves and later backed a board resolution, along with co-director Win Phyu Shwe, to evict her from the unit at The Seafront on Meyer.

On the night of August 25, 2021, Bhojwani was barred by security from entering the unit. Boxes of her belongings were left outside in the corridor. At the time, her father was mentally incapacitated; he died in November 2024.

She alleged that her brother orchestrated the eviction and argued that it was “unconscionable” to be removed after sacrificing career prospects to care for her parents.

However, the judge noted she had a “propensity to ramble” and failed to give precise evidence of any such promise.

At one point, she claimed it was her right to stay “for as long as her family wanted,” then said her parents wanted her to stay “as long as she wished.”

Under cross-examination, she admitted she cared for her parents “out of love and nothing else” — undermining her own claim. Though she tried to walk back that statement, the judge rejected her explanation.

Lawyers Mahmood Gaznavi and Rezza Gaznavi represented HVS Properties and its director, while Christopher Anand Daniel and Ganga Avadiar acted for the mother. Bhojwani was represented by Ushan Premaratne.