1 day ago
Singapore Court Rejects CEO’s ₹3.5 Crore Ex-Girlfriend Claim
Chander Agarwal and Felicia Lee met on a flight and later became a couple.
Agarwal spent a lot of money on Lee before and during their relationship.
He paid for trips, luxury goods and some of her personal expenses.
After they broke up, he said the money had been loans that Lee needed to repay.
Lee said the money had been gifts, not loans.
The judge found no clear proof that Lee had asked to borrow the money or promised to repay it.
Messages also showed Agarwal had sometimes offered to pay for expenses himself.
The judge did not accept a disputed handwritten agreement as reliable proof.
The court therefore rejected Agarwal’s claim for S$468,090.
TCI Express CEO Chander Agarwal sought to recover S$468,090, or about ₹3.5 crore, from former girlfriend Felicia Lee.
Agarwal said the spending represented interest-free loans, while Lee maintained that the payments were gifts.
The claim covered about S$206,000 in credit-card expenses, S$129,000 in overseas trips, education, insurance and feng shui services.
Senior Judge Lee Seiu Kin found no convincing evidence that Lee had requested or agreed to repay the money.
The Singapore High Court dismissed the claim in full after finding the spending was part of a pattern of gifts.
- Who
- Chander Agarwal, CEO and managing director of TCI Express Limited, sued his former girlfriend Felicia Lee.
- What
- The Singapore High Court dismissed Agarwal’s claim to recover S$468,090 in relationship-related spending.
- Where
- The case was heard in the Singapore High Court.
- When
- Agarwal filed the lawsuit in March 2024; the judgment was delivered on September 9, 2026.
- Why
- The court found that Agarwal had not proved the payments were loans or that Lee had agreed to repay them.
Agarwal’s claims
Lee’s position and the court’s findings
Nature of the spending
Agarwal’s claims
Agarwal argued that the money spent on Lee during their relationship consisted of interest-free loans that she was required to repay.
Lee’s position and the court’s findings
Lee said the payments were gifts, and the court concluded that the spending reflected Agarwal’s generosity and an established pattern of gifting.
Evidence of repayment
Agarwal’s claims
Agarwal relied on WhatsApp exchanges, a disputed handwritten agreement and his argument that some expenses, including feng shui services, must have been loans.
Lee’s position and the court’s findings
Lee denied signing the handwritten document, and the judge found no convincing evidence that she had requested the money as loans or agreed to repay it. Messages showed Agarwal had offered to pay for some expenses himself.
Conduct after the breakup
Agarwal’s claims
Agarwal sought repayment after the relationship ended and also argued that Lee had misrepresented their exclusivity, contributing to his spending.
Lee’s position and the court’s findings
The judge found that Agarwal’s attitude toward the money appeared to change after the breakup and rejected the additional argument, noting evidence that Agarwal himself had relationships with other women during the same period.
Key facts
- Claimed amount
- S$468,090, reported as approximately ₹3.5 crore.
- Relationship timeline
- Agarwal and Lee met on a flight in 2019, began a romantic relationship in September 2022 and separated around December 2023.
- Credit-card spending
- About S$206,000 in personal expenses charged to Agarwal’s American Express card.
- Travel spending
- Approximately S$129,000 on overseas trips, including first-class flights.
- Other expenses
- The claim also included about S$20,000 in life-insurance premiums, around S$30,000 for a Stanford-NUS programme and about S$16,776 to S$17,000 for feng shui services.
- Disputed evidence
- Lee denied signing a handwritten agreement, and the judge found it unsafe to conclude that she had signed it.
- Outcome
- The claim was dismissed in full, so Lee was not ordered to repay the disputed amount.
Quotes
Senior Judge Lee Seiu Kin
Singapore High Court senior judge who ruled on Agarwal’s claim
“This case shows that such emotion is not the sole province of one gender.”
indianexpress.com
William Congreve
English playwright whose quotation was cited by Senior Judge Lee Seiu Kin in the judgment
“Heav’n has no rage, like love to hatred turn’d, nor hell a fury like a woman scorn’d.”
livemint.com
Sources
Related news
Singapore court rejects CEO’s bid to recover ex-girlfriend’s gifts
Delhi Woman Wins Compensation After Bra Overcharging Dispute
Supreme Court Ends 11-Year Fight, Fines Both Parties ₹5 Lakh
Mumbai Court Upholds Dismissal of Sunny Leone Commission Case
Judge Awards Blake Lively $407,000 in Baldoni Case
