Month: November 2025

The dispute over late industrialist Sunjay Kapur’s inheritance took a sharper turn in the Delhi High Court on Thursday, as the bench questioned the credibility of the Will presented by his widow Priya Kapur. Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, representing Priya, attempted to defend the document, but the court raised repeated concerns about inconsistencies, drafting errors and the absence of proof linking Sunjay to the Will. ‘Template’ Explanation Draws More Doubts Nayar argued that errors in the Will such as referring to Sunjay as “testatrix,” misspelled names, and incorrect pronouns were copied from a “template” based on Sunjay’s mother Rani Kapur’s Will. However, the bench pressed him on why a billionaire with vast assets would adopt an old template without correcting basic information about his own life and family. The explanation also highlighted what the Will leaves out: no inventory of Sunjay’s major assets no mention of his first two children, Samaira and Kiaan only Priya and her children, Safira and Azarius, named as beneficiariesSenior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani argued that this selective inclusion makes the Will “a manufactured document tailored to benefit one side.” Misspelled Son’s Name Raises Red Flags Nayar’s justification for the misspelling of Azarius (“Azarias”) that it came from Rani’s Will raised further questions. Critics asked why parents would rely on a mother-in-law’s testamentary document to spell their own child’s name. Sunjay’s sister Mandhira Kapur echoed these concerns publicly, saying, “My brother was a particular human being. He can’t misspell his son’s name. These are giveaways.” Procedural Gaps: Notarisation Missing Another key point raised was the lack of notarisation. Rani Kapur’s Will the alleged template was notarised, but the Will produced for Sunjay was neither notarised nor registered, despite involving a far larger estate. Nayar claimed that Nitin Sharma drafted the Will, but his name appears in neither Priya’s Written Statement nor Nitin’s own affidavit, adding to doubts about authenticity. No Proof of Sunjay’s Involvement The court noted that the defence has not produced a single document showing Sunjay reviewed or approved the Will. There is no email, message, instruction, or annotation linking Sunjay to the drafting process. While Sunjay’s name appears in the notary register for past documents indicating he understood formal procedures no such steps were taken for this Will. The bench also clarified that a WhatsApp screenshot cannot be treated as proof of affirmation. Legal Precedent Cited by Defence Under Supreme Court Review The defence invoked the Sanjay Kalra judgment, but the court observed that the case was decided after a full trial unlike the interim stage here and is currently under review by the Supreme Court. Jethmalani argued that the issues in the Kapur Will go well beyond minor mistakes and directly concern the question of who actually authored the document. Forensic Concerns Add Pressure The plaintiffs have pointed to forensic analysis suggesting the Will originated on a device not linked to Sunjay. Nayar’s explanation that the document was saved by employee Nitin Sharma does not address the absence of any digital trail connecting Sunjay to the Will. With the matter returning to court on Friday, Priya Kapur’s legal team faces growing pressure to address not just typographical issues but the broader question of whether the Will was created or approved by Sunjay Kapur at all. Also Read: “Samaira and Kiaan being robbed of everything that is rightfully theirs”: Sunjay Kapur’s sister Mandhira accuses Priya Sachdev of theft, withholding transparency.