Major Gaps Found in Sunjay Kapur Will Case as Defence Struggles in Court
The Delhi High Court has raised serious questions about the validity of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur’s will. The court hearing on Thursday revealed multiple problems with the document presented by his widow Priya Kapur. Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar defended the will but faced tough questions from the bench.
Template Explanation Fails to Convince Court
The court questioned why a billionaire would use an old template without correcting basic errors. The will contains significant mistakes including calling Sunjay “testatrix” instead of “testator.” Names are misspelled and pronouns are incorrect. Nayar claimed these errors came from copying Sunjay’s mother Rani Kapur’s will. However, the bench found this explanation difficult to accept for someone with substantial assets.
The will also shows important omissions. It does not list Sunjay’s major assets. It completely excludes his first two children Samaira and Kiaan. Only Priya and her children Safira and Azarius are named as beneficiaries. Senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani called this selective approach evidence of a manufactured document designed to benefit one side.
Misspelled Names Raise Suspicion
The misspelling of Azarius as “Azarias” caused particular concern. Nayar claimed this spelling came from Rani Kapur’s will. Critics question why parents would rely on a grandmother’s document to spell their own child’s name. Sunjay’s sister Mandhira Kapur publicly stated that her brother would never misspell his son’s name. She called these errors clear giveaways.
Procedural Problems Add to Doubts
The lack of notarisation presents another major issue. Rani Kapur’s will was properly notarised. However, the will presented for Sunjay was neither notarised nor registered. This is surprising given the size of his estate. The document involves far greater assets than his mother’s will yet lacks basic legal formalities.
Nayar claimed that Nitin Sharma drafted the will. However, Sharma’s name appears in neither Priya’s written statement nor his own affidavit. This absence adds to questions about the document’s authenticity.
No Evidence Links Sunjay to Will
The court noted the complete absence of documents showing Sunjay’s involvement. There are no emails, messages, instructions, or annotations connecting him to the drafting process. Past documents show Sunjay understood proper procedures. His name appears in notary registers for previous legal matters. Yet no such steps were taken for this will.
The bench also clarified that a WhatsApp screenshot cannot serve as proof of affirmation. This removes a potential defence argument about digital communication.
Legal Precedent Faces Supreme Court Review
The defence cited the Sanjay Kalra judgment to support their case. However, the court observed important differences. The Kalra case was decided after a full trial while the Kapur matter remains at an interim stage. Additionally, the Supreme Court is currently reviewing the Kalra judgment. Jethmalani argued that the problems with the Kapur will go beyond minor mistakes and touch on fundamental questions of authorship.
Forensic Analysis Creates Additional Concerns
Plaintiffs have presented forensic evidence suggesting the will originated on a device not linked to Sunjay. Nayar’s explanation that employee Nitin Sharma saved the document does not address this concern. The absence of any digital trail connecting Sunjay to the will remains unexplained.
The case returns to court on Friday with increasing pressure on Priya Kapur’s legal team. They must address not just typographical errors but the fundamental question of whether Sunjay Kapur ever saw or approved this document. The outcome could determine the distribution of a substantial industrial fortune.
Leave a Reply