Karisma Kapoor's kids dispute Sunjay Kapur's Will, call it forged

Sunjay Kapur's children tell Delhi High Court their father's alleged Will is forged, citing misspelled names, wrong addresses, and missing asset details

The children of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur and actor Karisma Kapoor on Monday told the Delhi High Court that the Will purportedly executed by their father was forged, pointing to several inconsistencies, including the misspelling of their son’s name and an incorrect address for their daughter in several places.

 

Appearing for Samaira Kapur and her brother Kiaan Raj Kapur (plaintiffs), Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani submitted before Justice Jyoti Singh that the errors were “completely uncharacteristic” of their father. The matter will be heard next on Tuesday.

 

“The Will is so casual that it demeans him,” Jethmalani said in his submissions on Monday, questioning both the document’s contents and its chain of custody.

 

Samaira (20) and Kiaan Raj (15), children of actor Karisma Kapoor and Sunjay Kapur, have challenged the authenticity of a Will that allegedly excludes them and have sought a share in their father’s estate. The suit has been filed against Sunjay Kapur’s wife, Priya Kapur; her son; Sunjay’s mother, Rani Kapur; and family friend Shradha Suri Marwah — the purported executor of a Will dated March 21, 2025.

 

The plaintiffs are seeking a share in their late father’s personal assets, which include a business empire estimated to be worth ₹30,000 crore.

 

Plaintiffs cite errors and lack of transparency

 

Jethmalani told the court that the executor had never been informed of her appointment, which he said was inconsistent with how a “well-organised and educated person like Mr Kapur” would have handled his affairs. He also argued that inaccuracies in the Will — including the use of Karisma Kapoor’s office address in place of his daughter’s residence and repeated spelling errors — cast serious aspersions on its authenticity.

 

The Will, Jethmalani said, did not contain details of key assets such as jewellery and digital holdings.

 

“This was not a Will Mr Kapur had prepared, read, or approved. If there is forgery, only one beneficiary stands to gain,” he argued.

 

Doubts raised over digital trail and multiple edits

 

The plaintiffs also questioned the electronic trail of the document. According to their submissions, the first Word file of the Will was prepared on February 10, 2025, on a device belonging to an individual named Nitin Sharma, while Kapur was on holiday with his son.

 

The file, they argued, showed it had been transferred from another computer, with no clarity on its source.

 

Jethmalani pointed to multiple modifications to the Will — first on March 17, then on the date of execution (March 21), and again on March 24 — and argued that the defendants had not explained who had made these changes.

 

He also referred to WhatsApp messages exchanged in a group with Priya Kapur and Dinesh Agarwal, where the Will was shared as a PDF and its name was changed twice.

 

“Two Wills, one for the husband and one for the wife, were being prepared simultaneously. These were not mutual Wills, and the circumstances remain unexplained,” he said.

 

Questions raised over chain of custody and timing

 

The plaintiffs further alleged that the WhatsApp messages were not backed by any electronic evidence certificate and that the contents of the Will had not been drafted by a lawyer.

 

“Almost every suspicious circumstance that can exist does,” Jethmalani argued, highlighting how the Will had been handed over to the executor at the time of Sunjay Kapur’s cremation.

 

“The very possession of the Will is questionable. There was a race to hand it over on such a solemn occasion,” he said.

 

The plaintiffs have received a copy of the Will but have not yet inspected the original. When the court asked whether any previous Wills existed, the plaintiffs said they were not aware of any.

 

HC directs confidentiality over asset details

 

The Delhi High Court had earlier allowed Priya Kapur to submit details of Sunjay Kapur’s assets in a sealed cover, subject to confidentiality. The court also directed that neither the parties nor their counsel in the case should make statements to the media or disclose case material.

 

Priya Kapur had applied for permission to furnish a list of Sunjay Kapur’s movable and immovable assets in a sealed cover or to form a “confidentiality club.”