Delhi HC Probes ₹30,000 Cr Kapur Estate, Orders Asset Disclosure Amid Will Forgery Claims

NEW DELHI – The Delhi High Court has initiated proceedings in a high-stakes inheritance battle over the estimated ₹30,000 crore estate of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, chairman of Sona Comstar. Justice Jyoti Singh has ordered Kapur's third wife, Priya Kapur, to disclose a comprehensive list of all assets held by the deceased as of his passing on June 12, 2025.

The order comes in a suit filed by Samaira Kapur and Kiaan Raj Kapur, the late industrialist's children with his former wife, Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor. The siblings allege their exclusion from their father's personal assets is based on a "forged and fabricated" Will, and they seek a partition of the estate.

The court has registered the plaint as a suit and issued notices to the defendants, including Priya Kapur, her minor son, the deceased's mother Rani Kapur, and the purported executor of the Will, Shradha Suri Marwah. The defendants have been directed to file written statements and replies to the interim relief application, with the matter set for further consideration on October 9.

"Let plaint be registered as suit... Defendant no 1 will file a list of all the assets (of the deceased), immovable or movable, known to said defendant as on June 12, 2025," Justice Singh directed, marking a crucial first step in securing the estate's assets pending the litigation's outcome.

Allegations of a Fabricated Will and Suspicious Circumstances

The core of the plaintiffs' case, argued by Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, revolves around a purported Will dated March 21, 2025. Jethmalani contended that the circumstances surrounding this document are profoundly suspicious, warranting judicial scrutiny.

He submitted that for weeks following Sunjay Kapur's death, Priya Kapur allegedly represented to the plaintiffs that no Will existed. The narrative changed dramatically during a family meeting on July 30, convened ostensibly to discuss family trust provisions. At this meeting, the executor, Shradha Suri Marwah, allegedly revealed the Will for the first time, reading it in haste and refusing to provide a copy unless the plaintiffs signed a non-disclosure agreement—a condition they rejected.

"The minors are class 1 heirs. First, it was represented to us that there was no Will by defendant 1 (Priya Kapur)," Jethmalani argued, highlighting the inconsistencies in the defendant's conduct.

The plaintiffs' counsel further emphasized several red flags that, in their view, point towards fabrication: * Total Exclusion of Children: The Will allegedly bequeaths the entirety of Sunjay Kapur's personal estate to Priya Kapur, completely disinheriting his two older children, who are Class I legal heirs under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. * Unregistered Document: The Will is admittedly not registered, a fact confirmed in court by the defense. While not a mandatory requirement, Jethmalani argued that the late Sunjay Kapur was known to be meticulous with legal documentation, making the non-registration of such a significant document highly unusual. * Questionable Timing: The revelation of the Will occurred 47 days after Kapur's demise, at a meeting convened for a different purpose. * Executor and Witnesses: The plaintiffs raised questions about the independence and knowledge of the witnesses and the executor, who also claimed to have seen the Will for the first time just before the family meeting.

The Defense: Prior Provision and Validity of the Will

Representing Priya Kapur, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar mounted a robust defense, asserting that the plaintiffs had already been substantially provided for. He revealed that just days before the Will's execution, assets worth a staggering ₹1,900 crore were transferred to the children through a family trust structure.

"So much of crying, six days before the Will, the plaintiffs received Rs. 1900 crores under the Trust worth of assets. I don't know how much is enough," Nayar stated, framing the suit as an attempt to gain more despite significant prior settlements.

Addressing the issue of the unregistered Will, Nayar contended that registration is not a prerequisite for a Will's validity, citing a Supreme Court judgment to support his position. This legal argument will likely be central to the defense's strategy in rebutting the "suspicious circumstances" claim.

Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for Priya Kapur's minor son, dismissed the plaintiffs' allegations as a "speculative shot in the dark," arguing that one cannot claim suspicious circumstances without having even seen the document. He maintained that the Will was an "original signed will," created on a Word document in February and properly executed on March 21 in the presence of witnesses.

An Intrafamily Conflict Unfolds

The court proceedings also brought to light deeper fissures within the Kapur family. Senior Advocate Vaibhav Gaggar, representing Sunjay Kapur’s mother, Rani Kapur, indicated her alignment with the grandchildren's cause. She expressed concerns that assets she settled into a family trust had been diverted.

"Today I have nothing. 10K crores worth of assets which otherwise are mine... I am the person who is got to make sure everyone gets it. Everything gone to Mr. Nayar's client," Gaggar submitted on behalf of Rani Kapur, suggesting a broader family opposition to Priya Kapur's alleged control over the estate. This intervention adds another layer of complexity to the dispute, transforming it from a conflict between a widow and stepchildren into a multi-front family saga.

Legal Implications and Next Steps

The court has adopted a cautious and structured approach. By ordering the disclosure of assets and setting a schedule for pleadings, it has ensured that the primary subject of the dispute is catalogued and preserved. The proposal to form a "confidentiality club" to allow the plaintiffs' legal team to inspect the original Will under controlled conditions balances the need for discovery with the defendants' concerns about confidentiality.

This case serves as a significant real-world application of established principles under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, particularly the doctrine of suspicious circumstances. The court will ultimately have to weigh the defense's argument of substantial prior provision against the plaintiffs' compelling claims of disinheritance under questionable conditions.

The key legal questions to be adjudicated include: 1. Proof of Due Execution: Can the defendants prove that the Will was duly signed and attested as required by law? 2. Testamentary Capacity: Did Sunjay Kapur possess the mental capacity to understand the nature and effect of his dispositions? 3. Dispelling Suspicion: Can the defendants provide a satisfactory explanation for the circumstances the plaintiffs have flagged as suspicious, such as the total exclusion of natural heirs and the non-registration of the Will?

The suit seeks a preliminary decree of partition granting the plaintiffs a 1/5th share each in the assets, alongside a mandatory injunction for a full rendering of accounts. As an immediate measure, they have also sought an injunction to restrain the defendants from alienating or creating any third-party interest in the estate's assets. The court will hear arguments on this ad-interim injunction on October 9, a hearing that will be closely watched by the legal and business communities alike.