Delhi High Court hears Priya Kapur's plea to dismiss partition suit by Karisma Kapoor's children

Questioning the maintainability of the partition suit filed by actor Karisma Kapoor children, who are seeking a share in their late father Sunjay Kapur's Rs 30,000 crore assets, industrialist’s widow Priya Kapur on Wednesday told the Delhi High Court that her husband’s will cannot be termed “bogus” or “forged” just for few typographical errors and incorrect spellings.

Senior counsel Rajiv Nayyar, appearing for Priya, told Justice Jyoti Singh that Sunjay’s March 21, 2025 will, which allegedly leaves his entire personal assets to his widow Priya, was genuine and that the allegations made by Samaira (20) and Kiaan (15) about the forged will are wrong and baseless.

“If the will is forged, will I spell my own son’s name wrong?," Priya’s counsel said while terming the dispute as “wife versus wife."

“The only grounds of challenge to a will are if the deceased was not in a sound mind or that he was under some coercion or inability to execute the will. Now I am being told that there are four additional grounds like wrong spelling, wrong address, errors like writing testatrix instead of testator and closeness of witnesses. Is a will to be invalidated because there are spelling errors?” Nayar asked, adding that no one has challenged the authenticity of Sunjay's signature on the will.

The late chairman of Sona Comstar was married to Priya Sachdev at the time of his death and had a son with her.

Nayyar said that “It’s a fit case to turn down the plaint. The claim is bereft of cause — they never challenged the will... “Such litigation should be nipped in the bud," he contended.

“It’s a bogus challenge, they knew about the will prior to the filing of the suit," he said, adding that the fact that the will was produced seven weeks after Sunjay’s death also does not invalidate it either.

“Is the discovery of the will after seven weeks a ground to challenge the will? Is that a challenge maintainable under the law? Suppose I kept the will in my pocket, and it surfaces at an appropriate time, will it be declared invalid?”

The senior counsel told the court that it was not a probate proceeding and the siblings had neither challenged the execution nor the Will in their pleadings. Prior to September 10, the existence of Will was known and even after that date the Will was put officially in sealed cover with copies to all. Despite this, there was no declaration asked for cancelling the Will, he said.

Nayyar said, “He (Sunjay) didn’t provide for the children in the will because he provided for them in the trust."

On the genuineness of the two witnesses to the will, Nayar said that they were the Chartered Accountant and Company Secretary and that Sunjay's father's will was also signed by a CA and CS working in the company. "I have also produced affidavits of the two witnesses," he added.

On Tueday, senior counsel Mahesh Jethmalani had pointed out that the will had so many inconsistencies and lack of testimony from any of the three living individuals involved in its preparation — Priya and two witnesses — could not be relied upon.

“There is no digital footprint, no handwriting, no evidence of his physical involvement — he's a digital ghost,” the counsel said, arguing that "unless Sunjay was of unsound mind or didn't know English, he wouldn't have signed a will containing such glaring grammatical and factual mistakes. A man with his education and reputation would never approve a document like this.”