Will Can't Be Disputed Citing Incorrect Spellings, Typos: Priya Kapur Tells Delhi High Court In Partition Suit By Karisma Kapoor's Children

Priya Kapur wife of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, told the Delhi High Court on Wednesday (October 14) that Karisma Kapoor's children, who have sought a share in their father's personal assets, cannot challenge their father's Will on the ground of use of incorrect spellings, address or writing testatrix instead of testator. 

Justice Jyoti Singh was hearing the suit filed by Bollywood actress Karisma Kapoor's children- Samaira Kapur and her brother, seeking a share in their late father's personal assets. The actress's children have filed the suit against Priya Kapur, her son, as well as the deceased's mother Rani Kapur and Shradha Suri Marwah- purported executor of a Will dated March 21, 2025.

Appearing for Priya Kapur, senior advocate Rajiv Nayar submitted that the entire plaint of the plaintiffs is bereft of any cause of action and there is no challenge to the Will.

"I disclose the Will on July 30. There were two opportunities to plaintiff. There was a Will reading. It was read out to everyone, including plaintiff. Everybody knew that there is a will of Sunjay Kapur in existence. Suit is filed on September 09, there is no reference or challenge to Will in the plaint...Will is shared with them on September 15. I am only on being aware of the Will. I put the entire Will and execution of my written statement. It is filed on October 13. What is important is at any stage the application is filed to substantially challenge the Will. A replication to atleast rebut the written statement… there is no replication," he said. 

Nayar said this was not a probate proceeding and the plaintiffs had neither challenged the execution or the Will in the pleadings. He said that prior to September 10, the existence of Will was known and even after that date the Will was put officially in sealed cover with copies to all.

Despite this, there was no declaration asked for cancelling the Will, he said. 

"They are conscious about existence of Will as far back on July 30 prior to the filing of the suit.Today we are dealing with non existent challenge to the Will. It's a bogus challenge...Now after the SC judgment, the court can suo motu reject the plaint. I need not move an application. Here they know the date and who is the executor," he said. 

He said that assuming the Will was not given on July 30, it was given certainly on September 15 pursuant to the court's direction. Hence, the plaintiffs were not prevented from amending their prayer to specifically challenge the Will. 

He said that in his experience as a lawyer, the only grounds to challenge Will is if the deceased was not of sound mind, was under coercion or under some inability to execute the Will, which are all grounds of challenge available in probate proceedings.

"I am assuming this to be probate proceedings. After 45 years, I am told that there are four additional grounds to invalidate a Will- wrong spelling, wrong address, writing testatrix instead of testator and closeness of witnesses. I ask myself, in the entire experience of your ladyship, both as lawyer and a judge, is this the requirement of proof in a probate case that a Will will be invalidated on any of these grounds? Because Rajiv is spelt as Rajeev and not Rajiv? Will it be invalidated because there is spelling mistake? Forgery has to be complete. No mistakes will be left. And this lady is not a housewife. She is an investment banker," he added. 

Giving an example Nayar asked that if he had kept the Will in his pocket and it had surfaced at an appropriate occasion, will that Will be set aside on this ground or will it be set aside on the ground that it wasn't signed by the deceased.

"Has anyone disputed the signatures? All that is said is that he couldn't have done it. We are to only see that whether the Will was executed by a person of sound mind in the presence of two attesting witnesses. The challenge is because the Will was given late. Or that he couldn't have executed. There is no challenge to the execution of the Will. Very important aspect which your ladyship will consider. Challenge to the execution of Will has nothing to do with subsequent events, how the Will surfaces. The Will may be in someone's custody, produced late, might be in locker for years, but the route of challenge in probate case…I am assuming it to be a case against me, as per me the pleadings don't call for any investigation into the Will. What is important is challenge to the production of Will. And we are talking about seven weeks," he added.

Nayar further said that the execution of the Will and the course of disclosure of Will has been disclosed on affidavit. There is no material today before the Court to assume a different course at all.

Earlier, senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appearing for the children submitted that in certain crucial places in the purported Will of their late father, the feminine form of testator is used, and given his "wisdom", it was not possible that the Will was signed by him.

It was also said that purported Will of their late father was forged, as it misspelt his son's name and gave an incorrect address of his daughter in multiple places. 

Pointing to errors in the Will, it was stated that the same were uncharacteristic of their father, adding that the Will is so casual that it demeans him.

Previously, the parties had told Court that neither they nor their counsel would make any statement in the press or leak any information regarding the case.

Background

It is the Plaintiffs' case that the purported will allegedly executed by their father is not a legal and valid document, is forged and fabricated and in any event surrounded by suspicious circumstances.

The suit thus seeks to restrain Kapur's second wife from acting and relying on the purported Will to deny the rights of inheritance vested in Kapoor's children.

It further seeks a preliminary decree for partition in favour of the Plaintiffs to the effect that the they be given 1/5th share each in the assets of their late father.

The children also seek a decree of mandatory injunction directing the Defendants to render full and complete records and accounts in relation to the personal assets and effects of their father upto the date of his demise.

The suit also seeks to restrain the Defendants from alienating, transferring, selling or in any manner creating any third-party interests in any of the personal assets and effects of their father. The suit has been filed through Advocates Shantanu Agarwal & Manas Arora.

The matter is now listed on Friday.

Case Title: MS. SAMAIRA KAPUR & ANR v. MRS. PRIYA KAPUR & ORS

CS(OS)-627/2025