Delhi High Court freezes Sunjay Kapur’s assets worth Rs 30,000 crore in big win for Karisma Kapoor’s children

Justice Jyoti Singh ordered status quo on all major assets, restraining any third-party transfers and operations of bank accounts or crypto holdings until trial resolves doubts over a contested will.

‘Suspicious will’ sparks legal firestorm

Sunjay Kapur, former Sona Comstar chairman, died suddenly on June 12, 2025, from a heart attack while playing a polo match in London. His children- Samaira and Kiaan- along with grandmother Rani Kapur, challenged a will naming third wife Priya as sole beneficiary, citing ‘suspicious circumstances’ like unregistered status, inconsistent language, lack of witnesses, and Priya’s dual role as propounder.

The court placed the onus on Priya to dispel these red flags, prioritising estate preservation during prolonged litigation.

Counsel for the widow of late businessman Sunjay Kapur, Priya Sachdev Kapur, Meghna Mishra said, “It seems to be a very balanced order where she has said that the status quo of the assets should be maintained, certain personal assets will be, which is something that was willingly also already offered by Priya Kapur during the course of the arguments. The court has also held that it does not have jurisdiction over the foreign assets. It is a balanced order which has been pronounced.”

On the onus on Priya Kapur to dispel the suspicions regarding the will, she added, “That is a standard order. It’s a question of trial and she has taken into account that Priya Kapur herself has offered not to dissipate the assets.”

Meanwhile , the counsel for late businessman Sunjay Kapur’s mother, Rani Kapur, Vaibhav Gaggar said, “Based on what has been read out in court, it seems to be a very strong order. It seems to have dealt with the contentions of all parties elaborately and seems to have come to a prima facie conclusion that A, the suspicious circumstances with respect to the will that had been set up by the defendants over here, which is Karisma Kapoor’s children and Rani Kapur, have a lot of merit on them. Now the onus has shifted onto Priya Sachdev to disprove all the suspicious circumstances. It is an absolute status quo on the assets.”

The injunction halts Priya Kapur from alienating equity in three Indian companies, artworks, demat accounts or high-value items. Foreign bank accounts stand frozen, alongside cryptocurrency wallets- no transfers or sales permitted. Bank statements must be filed immediately.

Late businessman Sunjay Kapur’s sister, Mandhira Kapur, said, “The next step is the forensic of the will to be done… Justice has been done… We are very happy with the first step towards this entire fight… Technically, these are my mother’s assets… We are more worried about the assets being dissipated; they need to come back to the family. The kids need to be looked after… This is a very good order for the family, my mother and the kids…”

While domestic movable and immovable assets (New York apartment, London property) fall under scrutiny, the court clarified no jurisdiction over foreign immovables. Total estate: nearly Rs 30,000 crore, including Rs 1.72 crore in disclosed banks despite Kapur’s Rs 60 crore annual salary from Aureus Investments.

Court slams dissipation risks

Observing trial delays, Justice Singh ruled affirmatively on preservation, “Assets should not be dissipated.” Petitioners alleged post-death account closures and asset concealment; Priya’s counsel Rajiv Nayar denied siphoning, defending the will’s format similarity to family precedents. Opposing counsel Mahesh Jethmalani demanded strict proof given Priya Kapur’s beneficiary status. Rani Kapur independently contested non-disclosure of the will’s existence.

Karisma Kapoor’s children claim Class-1 heir shares (one-fifth each) from personal assets like crypto, art, global properties and residuary estate. Priya Kapur’s defenses failed to lift interim restraints, ensuring no erosion pending full probate. The order underscores judicial caution in mega-estate rows, protecting minors’ interests against potential undue influence allegations.