New claims emerged in the Delhi High Court regarding the inheritance of Sunjay Kapur. Karisma Kapoor’s children are questioning the validity of their father’s will. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani highlighted inconsistencies, including the use of feminine pronouns for Sunjay Kapur. The court also heard arguments about the will’s origin and alleged control over the estate.
The ongoing inheritance dispute over late Sunjay Kapur’s estate has taken a dramatic turn in the Delhi High Court. Karisma Kapoor’s children, Samaira and Kiaan, are challenging the authenticity of their father’s alleged will, raising serious questions about its language, origins, and intent.
Jethmalani questions the will’s credibility
Before Justice Jyoti Singh, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani argued that the purported will could not have been signed by Sunjay Kapur, pointing out that “in certain crucial places in the purported Will of their late father, the feminine form of testator is used.” He added, “Given the wisdom of the deceased, it was not possible that the Will was signed by their father.”The court was told that the digitally executed will refers to Sunjay Kapur as “she” and “her” multiple times, which Jethmalani called “not just implausible but deeply incriminating.” He added, “When you find ‘she’ and ‘her’ four times in a will supposedly written by Sunjay Kapur — a man known for precision and pride in his image — it’s impossible to believe he drafted it.”
Specific clause highlights anomalies
Hghlighting a specific clause, Jethmalani read from the document: “Signed and declared by Sunjay Kapur the testatrix above named as and for her last will.” He commented, “The female form of testator is used… testator is now a she! This is an absurdity… It shows the audacity which people have to present something like this in court… there is no explanation for this clause, there can’t be. Unless Sunjay was of unsound mind incapable of reading English, could never have signed this… In short, Sunjay Kapur has signed this Will as a woman. It is replete with feminine pronoun… It says ‘her last will’, ‘her presence’…” Calling the will’s language “a document that would have ruined his reputation,” Jethmalani argued that it destroys its own credibility.
Priya Kapur called ‘an acute gambler’
In one of the hearing’s most intense moments, Jethmalani called Priya Kapur “an acute gambler,” implying she had risked her husband’s legacy for control. “Good luck to her,” he added, “but not at the cost of two children being robbed of their inheritance.”While Priya Kapur’s lawyer dismissed the petition as driven by “greedy motives” of Karisma Kapoor’s children, Jethmalani retorted, “Everything they receive comes from their grandmother and father. You call them greedy? Your greed, Madam, is far greater — and it’s written into every line of this will.”
Questions about the will’s origin
Jethmalani further pointed out that the defendants’ pleadings do not reveal who actually prepared the will. “What we have is Sunjay Kapur — a meticulous person — has only an alleged digital footprint; that also in the entire conspectus he is a digital ghost. He does not appear physically. There is no handwriting, no evidence of photographs. There is only some oral evidence which is circumspect. The witnesses have not filed a detailed affidavit yet. Nobody knows what was the time and exact location,” he said. He added that neither Defendant 1, Priya Kapur, nor the two witnesses to the will had stated who drafted it.Furthermore, the filings indicate that the document makes no mention of Sunjay Kapur’s mother, Rani Kapur — a glaring omission, Jethmalani said, for someone who had always cared for her. “Her exclusion defies logic and decency,” he told the court. “It shows this document was not written by a son, but by someone who wanted his mother erased from the estate.”
Alleged takeover of the estate
Jethmalani argued that Priya Kapur now controls a large part of the estate, calling it “a takeover under the guise of widowhood.” He highlighted errors in the will, like misspelt names, wrong addresses, and an informal tone, saying these were not Sunjay’s words. He added that the will had issues at every stage — preparation, circulation, and delivery — with missing signatures and unclear origins. Jethmalani also questioned why it was never registered, noting that a man like Sunjay would have made any inheritance intentions clear and legal.The Delhi High Court is set to resume on October 15. Go to Source
