Hyderabad: A feud over property between former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy and his sister YS Sharmila has turned into a high-profile legal battle. Mr Reddy had written to the National Company Law Tribunal or NCLT, seeking to nullify her “illegal’ transfer of shares in Saraswati Power and Industries Private Limited to herself and their mother YS Vijayalakshmi. He also wrote to her, accusing her of deceit and declaring that he has no intention of honouring a Memorandum of Understanding they had entered. After the contents of his letter became known, her written response to him has also gone public.While Mr Reddy had said there was no more affection between the two, Sharmila has accused him of not distributing assets equally between the four grandchildren of YS Rajasekhar Reddy, as desired by him.On September 10, Mr Reddy and his wife Bharathi Reddy had petitioned NCLT, asking the company to reinstate them as shareholders with the same equity shares as before the transfers were made by Sharmila. After a public falling out with her brother, YS Sharmila had floated her own party in 2021. The YSR Telangana party, however, was merged with the Congress ahead of the 2024 elections. YS Sharmila was made the chief of Andhra Pradesh Congress, and she has sharply attacked Mr Reddy, who was Chief Minister at the time. She had also contested and lost from the Kadapa Lok Sabha constituency against her cousin Avinash during the elections in May.In the petition, Mr Reddy and his wife alleged that share transfers to Sharmila and Vijayamma were carried out through a Board resolution in July 2024 without following proper legal procedure. The petition also said Mr Reddy had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Sharmila in August 2019 to transfer certain properties and shares “out of love and affection” but this transfer was never executed. In view of the rivalry between the siblings, Mr Reddy had changed his mind.The recent share transfers were made in violation of this MoU and were the culmination of a “deceitful deviance of law”. Mr Reddy argued that the transfer of shares was “invalid, illegal, void, and unlawful”.The NCLT has issued notices to all respondents and scheduled the next hearing for November 8.Mr Reddy had also written to his sister on August 27, pointing out that along with the ancestral property inherited from their father YS Rajasekhara Reddy, he had also built his own businesses.”Out of the sheer love and affection, I always bore towards you as my sister, I had also expressed my intention that, unrelated to any consideration and purely out of love and affection, I intended to effect transfer of certain properties to you at a future point of time. This was in addition to the amount of approximately Rs.200 crores already given to you directly or through our mother over the last decade or so. This too was given by me out of my sheer love and affection for you,” he wrote.But despite his affection, Sharmila made several false statements publicly which caused personal disrepute, he wrote. “In view of this and other actions undertaken by you, it makes me wonder why there should be any love and affection or fondness towards you”.Responding to the letter on September 12, Sharmila wrote that Mr Reddy was not acting in accordance of the will of their late father to distribute the property equally among all four of his grandchildren. “Our father was unequivocal in his instructions that all four of his grandchildren are to share equally in all assets that existed during his lifetime, whether they pertain to Bharathi Cements, Sakshi, or any other ventures initiated prior to his passing.”Contending that the transfer of shares was part of the property sharing “settlement,” she added, “Since you had the upper hand, you did bulldoze your way and we agreed to a settlement as stated in the MOU. Since you are my elder brother and in the interest of resolving family disputes, I agreed to give up my equal share. Thus, under the MoU executed on 31.08.2019, only a few properties were assigned to me.””You have now chosen to file cases against your own mother and deprive your own sister and her children of properties to which they are entitled under the MoU. I am appalled at the extent to which you have strayed from the path of our noble father,” she wrote.She also criticised Mr Reddy’s intervention in her political career, claiming it was “absurd” of him to suggest that she sign a clause that binds her from speaking against him or their cousin Avinash from public platforms.