Industrial Sunjay Kapur and Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor‘s ex-husband passed away earlier this year. Caught amid the alleged Rs 30,000 crore estate battle, Sunjay Kapur’s last-known partner, Priya Kapur, locked horns with the Bollywood actress. Despite their separation, Sunjay was close to their children, Kiaan and Samaira. As the matter reached court, the inheritance battle soon became a controversial affair.
Karisma and Sunjay Kapur‘s daughter has been studying at a US-based university. Karisma Kapoor’s legal representation, in the latest proceedings, alleged that the children’s educational expenses had not been paid for two months. Senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani added, “The children’s estate is with defendant no.1 (Priya Kapur). So, it is up to her,” reported PTI.
Those representing Priya Kapur, however, denied the claims. While Karisma’s legal defence alleged the mishandling of the will pointed at ‘broader inconsistencies.’ Kapur’s lawyer, senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, argued in defence that the needs of the children were indeed taken care of. They clarified that the fees had already been paid.
Delhi HC lobbies to avoid ‘melodrama’
Justice Jyoti Singh, upon hearing both the arguments, urged that such issues should not come to court, reported Bar and Bench. She instructed senior advocate Shyel Trehan, also representing Priya Kapur, to ensure that such issues are tended to.
Justice Singh noted, “I don’t want to spend more than 30 seconds on this. This question should not come to my court again. I don’t want this hearing to be melodramatic. I put this onus on you [Shyel Trehan]. This point should not come again.”
Sunjay Kapur’s ‘lack of input’ questioned
Justice Singh had previously questioned the inconsistencies between the alleged modification of Sunjay Kapur’s will in March 2025. As the case unfurled, it was found that the will was modified on March 17 while Kapur was in Goa with his and Karisma’s son, Kiaan. Based on several digital records, the updated version was executed on March 21 in his Gurugram office. However, there was no reaction or acknowledgement received from the deceased.
Raising doubt on this timeline, there are several virtual exchanges about the will, evening in October 2025, thus raising eyebrows. While the timestamp says March 17, it fails to match with several accounts presented during the proceedings
