Just today, Smita Gate was seen peeling another layer of accusations against her husband, Nitish Bharadwaj. As per the news, Smita has filed a darkhast in the family court against the actor, Times Now/Telly Talk contacted Nitish, who laughed off the claims. Scroll down to know the full story:
Nitish Bharadwaj REBUKES Smita Gate’s CLAIMS Of Asking The Family Court To Sell His Property – Exclusive
The case between Mahabharat actor Nitish Bharadwaj and Smita Gate has been on the hot burner ever since the relationship between the two went caput. Just today (February 23, 2024), news about Smita taking the matter to the family court came to light.
It said that Smita has sought help from the court to attach movable property and sell Nitish Bharadwaj’s houseold goods so that she can use the money for the maintenance of her children. Her lawyer, Chinmay Vaidya, refused to divulge information and confirmed that a darkhast has been filed in the family court.
Nitish reacts to Smita’s claims
A few minutes ago, Times Now/Telly Talk got in touch with Nitish, who laughed off Smita’s claims. He said, “I am amused, as my lawyer is not aware of any such thing. In fact, I have filed for an injunction against her that she cannot part with the Pune property, which was bought with 70% of my money. She was supposed to file her reply to my injunction application, which she still has not done.”
Talking about the allegations made by Smita, Nitish went on to mention how, in their last court meeting, nothing was brought forward. He said, “We had our court hearing on February 6th; both she and I weren’t there. My lawyer was there, and her lawyer’s junior was there as a representative. We filed Lawrence school communication on record, but no one from her side said anything about this case.”
“Smita Gate can only dream that after hiding crucial information from the Hon’ble Court regarding the rent she is collecting surreptitiously from the Pune property, any court will support her plea,” the Mahabharat actor further said.
“Any ex-parte decision would be against the principles of natural justice. I have also applied for the withdrawal of the said interim maintenance order, which is yet to be heard,” concluded Nitish.
