The inheritance dispute surrounding the estate of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur has taken a contentious turn in the Delhi High Court, with allegations that minor errors in the will are being used to challenge its authenticity. Priya Sachdev Kapur, the widow of Sunjay Kapur, appeared before the court on Wednesday to defend the legitimacy of her husband’s will, asserting that typographical errors cannot invalidate a document executed with proper legal formalities.

Background of the Case

Sunjay Kapur, a prominent industrialist and chairperson of Sona Comstar, passed away in London in June 2025, leaving behind a complex web of personal and corporate assets. The dispute over his fortune began shortly after his death, as multiple heirs, including his children from previous family relations, sought recognition and a share in his estate.

Priya Kapur, who was married to Sunjay Kapur, is also an investment banker, and she has strongly defended the will executed by her late husband on March 21, 2025. The legal challenge comes from Karisma Kapoor’s children—Samaira, 20, and Kiaan Kapur, 15—who have filed a civil suit claiming a portion of Sunjay Kapur’s personal assets. The suit names Priya Kapur, her son, Sunjay’s mother Rani Kapur, and Shradha Suri Marwah, the purported executor of the will.

Court Arguments

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, representing Priya Kapur, addressed allegations regarding typographical errors, such as incorrect spellings of names, wrong addresses, and the use of the term “testatrix” instead of “testator.” Nayar contended that such minor mistakes should not cast doubt on the authenticity of a will, emphasizing that the decisive factors are whether the deceased was of sound mind at the time of execution and whether the will was properly witnessed.

“I am told that there are four additional grounds to invalidate a will—wrong spelling, wrong address, writing testatrix instead of testator, and the closeness of witnesses. In my 45 years of experience, I have never seen a will invalidated for spelling errors,” Nayar argued before Justice Jyoti Singh. He further noted that Priya Kapur, as a professional investment banker, would not make egregious errors such as misspelling her own son’s name, highlighting the implausibility of claims that the will is inauthentic due to typographical mistakes.

Nayar also stressed that a will is judged based on the genuineness of signatures and proper attestation, not on its custody or the timing of its discovery. He said, “Forgery has to be complete; no mistakes would be left. A will is not judged by whose custody it remained in or when it surfaced, but by whether it bears genuine signatures and proper attestation.”

Counterarguments by Plaintiffs

On the other side, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, representing Karisma Kapoor’s children, questioned the credibility of the will, pointing out what he described as “bloopers” and mistakes that were allegedly uncharacteristic of Sunjay Kapur. Jethmalani argued that the errors raise legitimate doubts about the will’s authenticity, especially since the children were reportedly unaware of the document until July 30, despite its execution on March 21.

The plaintiffs contend that the timing of the will’s disclosure, along with inconsistencies in the document, warrant a thorough judicial review. They argue that these “glitches” could indicate either procedural lapses or intentional attempts to misrepresent Sunjay Kapur’s intentions, and therefore merit a challenge in court.

Family Background and Complications

The Kapur family’s inheritance matters are further complicated by Sunjay Kapur’s mother, Rani Kapur, who had previously invoked a 2015 will claiming sole ownership of the family assets. The overlapping claims have turned what might have been a straightforward estate settlement into a protracted legal battle involving multiple heirs and contested documents.

The deceased industrialist’s children from previous relationships, represented in this suit by Samaira and Kiaan, seek a portion of the estate, arguing that they are rightful beneficiaries. The case has drawn attention due to the prominence of the Kapur family in India’s industrial and entertainment circles, as well as the significant value of the estate in question.

Legal Precedent and Implications

The case touches upon critical aspects of Indian inheritance law, particularly regarding the validity of wills and the weight of minor errors. Courts in India have historically held that typographical mistakes or minor spelling errors do not invalidate a will if it was executed voluntarily, in sound mind, and in the presence of witnesses. Nayar’s arguments are rooted in this precedent, asserting that the substance of the will—rather than inconsequential errors—determines its enforceability.

At the same time, the plaintiffs’ claims highlight the importance of transparency, proper disclosure, and timing in will execution and registration. The delay in informing potential heirs about the new will can raise suspicions, particularly when substantial assets are involved.

Current Status and Outlook

The Delhi High Court is expected to consider detailed submissions from both sides, weighing evidence related to the authenticity of signatures, attestation by witnesses, and the mental capacity of Sunjay Kapur at the time of executing the will. The court may also examine procedural aspects, such as whether the will’s disclosure and custody comply with legal norms.

Given the prominence of the Kapur family and the value of the estate, the proceedings are likely to be closely monitored by the media, legal commentators, and the public. The outcome could set a precedent for how minor errors and delayed disclosures are treated in contested inheritance cases in India.

Conclusion

The dispute over Sunjay Kapur’s estate highlights the complex interplay between legal formalities, family dynamics, and the interpretation of wills. While Priya Kapur’s counsel stresses the primacy of intent, sound mind, and proper execution, the plaintiffs argue that typographical errors and delayed disclosure warrant judicial scrutiny.

As the Delhi High Court continues to hear arguments, the case underscores the importance of clear documentation, timely communication with heirs, and careful execution of testamentary documents. Ultimately, the resolution will hinge on the court’s assessment of authenticity, intent, and adherence to legal requirements, shaping the inheritance landscape for high-profile estates in India.