Sunjay Kapur Estate Dispute: Children Point To Misspelt Names, Wrong Addresses In Will

The Delhi High Court on Monday, October 13, took up the high-profile inheritance dispute of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, heir to the Sona BLW automotive empire. The focus now is on alleged digital tampering, as Sunjay’s children, Samaira and Kiaan Kapur, claim that a will diverting the ₹30,000-crore estate to his third wife, Priya Kapur, was “manufactured” and digitally altered. The petition also names Priya’s son, Sunjay’s mother Rani Kapur, and executor Shradha Suri Marwah, challenging the authenticity of the March 21, 2025 document.

Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, representing the children, argued that the will was “not the product of the deceased’s hand or mind” but a “manufactured document” created on Nitin Sharma’s computer, who has no formal connection to Sunjay Kapur. “The file was created and altered on Sharma’s system on March 17, 2025 — the very day Sunjay was in Goa with his son Kiaan. It defies logic that he would rewrite his will on holiday while disinheriting his own children,” Jethmalani told the court.

Alleged Digital Fabrication and WhatsApp Controversy

The lawyer explained that the will was converted into a PDF on March 24 and circulated in a WhatsApp group named ‘Family Office IC,’ later modified multiple times. “There was a WhatsApp group with Sunjay and Priya Kapur, and Dinesh Agarwal, where the Will was sent as a PDF file, and its name was again changed twice. Two Wills were being simultaneously prepared of husband and wife. These were not mutual Will, so they have to be explained…they had also spoken about signed wills, and the message was acknowledged by Priya. Not Sunjay,” Jethmalani said.

He added, “If we see Dinesh’s phone, it can be seen that there is no group chat name or the phone numbers, and then separately it can be checked that the ‘SK Will’ was only seen, not read. This is an ominously uncertified document. It is surprising they moved from emails to WhatsApp chats. He certifies only the emails and not the WhatsApp chats.”

Contradictions and Missing Asset Details

The petition highlights multiple inconsistencies, including missing properties such as Sunjay’s New York apartment, a 2010 family trust, and other assets in jewelry, artwork, and precious metals. “These are not clerical errors,” Jethmalani emphasized, noting even the children’s names were spelled inconsistently. The absence of a standard schedule of assets further raises questions about the will’s legitimacy.

Describing Sunjay Kapur as “a devoted father and a perfectionist in both business and life,” Jethmalani said, “The idea that such a man would exclude his children is beyond belief. This will should be cast into the dustbin of history. It bears no mark of the deceased’s hand or heart.”

The court noted that the evidence raised “substantial questions” about the will’s authenticity and adjourned the hearing to Tuesday, October 14, for further examination of the digital trail and the document’s physical custody. Priya Kapur’s counsel maintains that “unimpeachable electronic evidence” supports the will’s validity.