Texas court overturns ruling against estate seeking to withdraw claims over disputed property deed

Texas court overturns ruling against estate seeking to withdraw claims over disputed property deed

In a contentious case involving allegations of forgery against Malachite Venture Corporation, the Texas First Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Doctor R.K. Dhingra's estate, allowing it to withdraw its claims. This decision overturned the trial court's earlier ruling, reinforcing that plaintiffs can withdraw claims before a judgment is reached, despite Malachite's objections regarding its counterclaims.

A disputed property deed can leave an estate fighting to recover land years after its owner's death, particularly when the signature authorising the original transfer is alleged to be forged. In Texas, the estate of a deceased doctor challenged a 2009 property transfer, claiming that a man who controlled the company receiving the land had forged the owner's signature. The dispute later involved another company that purchased the property and sought to defend its ownership.In a November 6, 2026, memorandum opinion available on Justia, the Texas First Court of Appeals ruled that the estate could withdraw its claims against the later buyer, Malachite Venture Corporation. The court reversed the trial court's refusal to recognise the withdrawal and its subsequent decision granting summary judgment to the buyer on the estate's claims. The appeals court held that the estate had filed its notice of nonsuit before judgment was entered and that the withdrawal did not prevent the buyer from pursuing any independent claims for affirmative relief.How the disputed property transfer beganThe case concerned land originally conveyed to Shiva Investment Group in 1992. In 2009, a deed purported to transfer the property from Shiva Investment Group to The 2525 Brothers, L.P. The document carried the signature of Dr. R.K. Dhingra, who had signed on behalf of the investment group.

In brief

A disputed property deed can leave an estate fighting to recover land years after its owner's death, particularly when the signature authorising the original transfer is alleged to be forged. The court reversed the trial court's refusal to recognise the withdrawal and its subsequent decision granting summary judgment to the buyer on the estate's claims. In 2009, a deed purported to transfer the property from Shiva Investment Group to The 2525 Brothers, L.P.

This is the opening of the story, shared with credit to The Times of India — World. The rest of the report — with every detail — continues on the publisher’s website.

Continue reading at The Times of India — World ↗

Cookie settings

Choose which cookies we may use. You can change this at any time from Cookie settings in the footer. Details of each cookie are in the Cookie Policy.

Strictly necessary

Needed for sign-in, security, payments and remembering these choices. Always on.

Preferences

Remember settings such as dark mode.

Analytics & performance

Help us count visits, understand which pages, devices and countries our readers use, and measure how well the site performs – anonymous and aggregated.

Advertising & marketing

Lets advertising partners show and personalise adverts, measure impressions, clicks and visits, prevent ad fraud and pay us – this is how the free site is funded.

🔔 News notifications

Get headlines from NewsHub on this device — even when the site is closed.

You can switch this off at any time. Works on Android, Windows, Mac and Linux browsers; on iPhone/iPad add the site to your Home Screen first.