Karisma Kapoor’s Kids Challenge Sunjay Kapur’s Will in Delhi HC

Karisma Kapoor’s children challenge Sunjay Kapur’s will: Delhi High Court seeks full asset disclosures

Children accuse stepmother Priya Sachdeva Kapur of forgery and call her “Cinderella stepmother” in court

Court asks Priya Kapur to list all assets as parties debate trust payouts and will validity

By Our Legal Reporter

New Delhi: October 10, 2025:

A high-stakes inheritance dispute has reached the Delhi High Court, as actor Karisma Kapoor’s children—Samaira and Kiaan—seek a share of their late father Sunjay Kapur’s estate, reported to be worth around ₹30,000 crore. They allege that Sunjay’s widow, Priya Sachdeva Kapur, forged or manipulated a will to gain control over the assets and the family trust. The Court has directed Priya to file a complete list of all movable and immovable assets of the deceased and has set procedural timelines for replies and rejoinders before considering interim relief.

Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, appearing for the children, told the Court the will is unregistered, was disclosed in haste, and is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, including claims that the executor learned of it only a day prior. Priya’s counsel, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, countered that the suit is not maintainable and that an unregistered will does not automatically lose validity under law.

The “Cinderella stepmother” remark and the children’s allegations

In a recent hearing, counsel for Karisma’s children characterized Priya Kapur as akin to a “Cinderella stepmother,” alleging she is “greedy,” and claimed she received about 60% of the assets, 12% allocated to her son, and control over approximately 75% of the family trust. The counsel urged the Court to maintain status quo on asset movements and pressed for a probe into alleged forgery. In separate reporting, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani alleged a criminal conspiracy involving Priya Sachdeva and others, questioned the digital footprint of the will’s creation, and pointed to changes purportedly made on March 17, 2025, while Sunjay was on holiday—claims that Priya’s side disputes.

The Court previously allowed Priya to submit a sealed list of assets and asked the parties to refrain from sharing details with the media, underlining the sensitivity and scale of the matter.

Priya Kapur’s response and claim of trust payouts

Priya Kapur’s legal team argued that the children are already beneficiaries of the trust and received assets worth ₹1,900 crore shortly before filing the case. They stressed that Priya is a widow with a young child and that the will, while unregistered, remains valid under established legal principles. Priya’s counsel also placed the will before the Court and suggested sharing it with the plaintiffs under a non-disclosure agreement, highlighting confidentiality concerns.

Priya’s counsel further noted that this dispute follows years of litigation arising from Karisma and Sunjay’s divorce, urging perspective on the history between the parties and the need to protect the deceased’s legacy from sensationalization.

Interventions and family trust concerns

Sunjay Kapur’s mother, Rani Kapur, moved the Court through her counsel, raising concerns that her rights under the trust had been eroded after Priya’s marriage. She flagged a sale of Sona Comstar shares allegedly worth ₹500 crore to a Singapore entity without her knowledge and sought status quo on the estate to prevent further prejudice. Her intervention underscores the broader family implications of the trust’s management and the need for transparency in asset handling during the pendency of the suit.

Key legal issues before the Court

Validity of the will:
The children argue the will is forged or manipulated, while Priya asserts that an unregistered will can still be valid. The Court will weigh evidence about its execution, disclosure timeline, and the executor’s knowledge.
Asset disclosures and interim control:
The Court has directed Priya to file a comprehensive list of assets, set timelines for pleadings, and will consider an ad-interim injunction to maintain status quo pending detailed hearings.
Trust distributions and beneficiaries:
The reported ₹1,900 crore distribution to the children is central to Priya’s defense, suggesting they are not deprived, while the plaintiffs claim inequitable control and benefit allocation within the trust structure.
Allegations of conspiracy and forgery:
The plaintiffs’ counsel has used strong language, including references to criminal conspiracy and claimed anomalies in digital trails, which will require forensic scrutiny and corroboration beyond rhetoric.

Timeline and procedural status

Justice Jyoti Singh’s bench has issued summons to the defendants with directions for written statements within two weeks and replications within one week. Replies to interim relief pleas are to be filed in two weeks, with rejoinders in one week thereafter. The Court noted that once the suit is registered, the doctrine of lis applies, signalling that parties must maintain caution in dealing with the assets during litigation. The matter was posted initially for consideration of ad-interim relief and continues with subsequent hearings, including dates set in late September and October.

Public interest and privacy considerations

Given Karisma Kapoor’s public profile, the case has drawn intense media attention. The Court has advised discretion regarding public disclosures, recognizing the risk of prejudicing the proceedings and the reputations of parties involved. At the heart of the dispute are questions of probate, trust governance, and equitable distribution in a large family business estate—issues that often require careful judicial management to balance transparency with confidentiality.

What to watch next

Asset list and scrutiny:
Priya Kapur’s comprehensive disclosure is expected to shape the next phase, clarifying asset contours and potentially revealing contested transactions or allocations.
Interim relief decision:
The Court’s view on maintaining status quo will affect immediate control and movement of assets, including trust operations and any sale of holdings.
Evidence on will and digital trails:
Any forensic or documentary examination of the will’s creation, custody, and disclosure could be decisive, especially considering the plaintiffs’ claims about timing and metadata.
Role of other beneficiaries:
Rani Kapur’s intervention and any inputs from trustees or executors will likely expand the factual matrix and arguments on fairness and fiduciary duties.

Direct answer

This dispute concerns Karisma Kapoor’s children challenging the authenticity of late Sunjay Kapur’s will and seeking equitable shares from a large estate and trust, while Priya Sachdeva Kapur defends the will’s validity and points to prior trust distributions. The Delhi High Court has ordered comprehensive asset disclosure and set tight timelines, with interim control and the will’s validity under focused scrutiny in upcoming hearings.