New Delhi: The legal battle surrounding the estate of late businessman Sunjay Kapur saw significant developments in the Delhi High Court on Thursday, with counsel representing his widow, Priya Sachdev (Priya Kapur), defending the validity of the disputed will. The case, brought forward after objections from Sunjay’s children with Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor—Samaira Kapoor and Kiaan Kapoor—has intensified over questions about alleged inconsistencies and omissions in the document.
Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Priya, argued that there was nothing unusual or suspicious in a husband choosing to bequeath his assets to his wife. Pointing to family precedent, he remarked, “There is nothing suspicious about a husband giving everything in his assets to his wife. As is the case in my father-in-law’s will, where everything was given to his wife. It is a healthy tradition which perhaps has been maintained.” His comments were recorded by news agency PTI.
Defence outlines will preparation timeline
Nayar detailed the sequence of events leading to the drafting of Sunjay Kapur’s contested will. According to him, a printout of the draft will was shown to Sunjay on 10 February 2025, after which Sunjay proposed certain changes. These suggestions, he said, were incorporated before the will was finalised on 17 March 2025, during Sunjay’s stay in Goa.
He further stated that Priya Kapur’s will and Sunjay’s will were prepared on the same day, calling it a customary practice among married couples. This point was raised amid allegations that the preparation timeline of the wills appeared unusual and required further scrutiny.
Court flags spelling errors and contradictions
A key point of contention in the hearing was the presence of spelling errors, pronoun mismatches and factual inconsistencies in the will. The bench, which had raised these concerns in earlier hearings as well, questioned how such inaccuracies could appear in a final version of a legal document governing a large estate.
Nayar maintained that the errors were the result of using a template based on the will of Sunjay’s mother, Rani Kapur. However, the court queried why a template intended for a different individual would contain details specific to Sunjay’s life, such as references to his children and personal information.
The bench also noted that one of the most glaring mistakes was the misspelling of Sunjay and Priya’s son Azarias’s name, which the defence again attributed to the template. The court asked why a document drafted in 2025 would rely on outdated or inaccurate information from an older will.
Omissions and procedural concerns
The court further observed that the will did not include an inventory of Sunjay’s assets, a standard and expected feature in a will of this nature. More importantly, it did not mention his older children, Samaira and Kiaan, listing only Priya and her children, Safira and Azarias, as beneficiaries. These omissions form one of the central arguments of the petitioners challenging the will.
Additional procedural inconsistencies were highlighted. While Rani Kapur’s will was notarised, the will submitted for Sunjay was neither notarised nor registered. Nayar stated that the will had been drafted by a man named Nitin Sharma, yet the court pointed out that this claim was not substantiated in Priya’s written statement or in any affidavit from Sharma himself.
No direct evidence of Sunjay’s approval
In a significant acknowledgment, the defence conceded that there is no direct documentary evidence—such as emails, text messages, annotations or written instructions—showing that Sunjay had reviewed or approved the final will.
The court also noted that while Sunjay’s signature appears in notary registers for other documents, the will was not part of those records. A previously submitted WhatsApp screenshot was discussed again, with the bench reiterating that it does not constitute confirmation of the will’s contents or its approval by Sunjay.
Case remains open
With questions over authenticity, procedural lapses and factual inconsistencies still unresolved, the Delhi High Court is set to continue hearings. Both sides are expected to present additional documentation and testimony as the dispute moves into its next phase.
The matter remains sub judice, and the final determination of the will’s validity is likely to have significant implications for the distribution of Sunjay Kapur’s estate.