The case, being heard by the Delhi High Court, turned dramatic on Thursday when the children compared their stepmother to the infamous character from the fairytale world \u2014 \u201cCinderella\u2019s stepmother.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Appearing on behalf of the Kapoor children, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani launched sharp allegations against Priya Kapur. He told the Court that right after Sunjay Kapur\u2019s death, Priya was in a \u201ctearing hurry\u201d<\/strong> to gain control over her late husband\u2019s wealth and limit the children\u2019s rightful share.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe tearing hurry was so that the children\u2019s share is restricted to 26% and she appropriates the rest. Therein lies the veneer. This is no benign stepmother. This is Cinderella\u2019s stepmother,\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Jethmalani said, referring to Lady Tremaine, the cruel stepmother from the Cinderella story. He alleged that Priya Kapur and her minor son control nearly 75% of the family trust, leaving Karisma Kapoor\u2019s children with only 26%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He also accused Priya of publicly spreading misinformation about the children\u2019s inheritance, saying that she had claimed they received nearly \u20b92,000 crore, which now makes them targets for criminals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese children are made targets of any kidnapper,\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n he told the court, warning that such statements endanger their safety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case was heard by Justice Jyoti Singh<\/strong>. The Kapoor siblings have sought an injunction to stop Priya Kapur from creating third-party rights over their father\u2019s properties until the partition case is resolved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They have also alleged that Priya forged Sunjay Kapur\u2019s will in collusion with two witnesses to take complete control of the assets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jethmalani questioned the validity of the alleged will dated March 21, 2025, which supposedly leaves Sunjay Kapur\u2019s entire personal estate to Priya Sachdev Kapur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAll these documents indicate that the person who was executing these assets was not the executor but Priya,\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n he said, referring to Shradha Suri Marwah, who was named as the executor of the will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jethmalani further alleged that Priya had manipulated the witnesses for personal gain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese witnesses are then appointed to positions in the company. The will is forged. It is a crime under Section 464 IPC, which is forgery. It carries life imprisonment,\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n he asserted, adding that neither of the two witnesses had filed affidavits supporting the will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThey have not and that makes it more suspicious,\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, Advocate Anuradha Dutt, appearing for the executor, strongly disputed Jethmalani\u2019s claims, arguing that the suit itself was not maintainable and that the will had not even been formally challenged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court was informed that Jethmalani had been personally present during the formal reading of the will, which, according to Priya\u2019s counsel, proves the document\u2019s legitimacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During Thursday\u2019s hearing, Justice Jyoti Singh opened the sealed envelope containing the will and the list of assets submitted by Priya Kapur. The Court noted that the list of assets did not bear any signature, which raised further concerns. The judge then directed Priya Kapur to resubmit the list with her signature and an affidavit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The hearing will continue on Monday, when Jethmalani will resume his arguments. After that, the lawyers representing Priya Kapur, Shradha Suri Marwah, and Rani Kapur (Sunjay\u2019s mother) will present their side. The family dispute now centers on the authenticity of the will, the distribution of over \u20b92,000 crore in assets, and the alleged forgery under Section 464 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a serious offence carrying life imprisonment if proven.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Case Details<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Counsels Appearing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
Karisma Kapoor and Sunjay Kapur were married from 2003 to 2016 and share two children. After their divorce, Sunjay married Priya Sachdev Kapur. <\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Delhi](\"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Delhi-High-Court-1-1024x576.webp\" "\\"\\"")
Explanatory Table of Laws and Sections Involved<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Law \/ Section<\/th> Statute \/ Act<\/th> Explanation in Simple Terms<\/th> Relevance to This Case<\/th><\/tr><\/thead> Section 464 IPC<\/td> Indian Penal Code, 1860<\/td> Defines \u201cforgery\u201d \u2014 creating, altering, or using a false document intending to cause harm or deceive. Punishable with imprisonment up to life.<\/td> Allegation by Jethmalani that Priya Kapur forged Sunjay Kapur\u2019s will
with help from witnesses.<\/td><\/tr>Forgery under IPC (Sections 463\u2013471)<\/td> Indian Penal Code, 1860<\/td> Covers a series of offences related to false documents, forged
signatures, and fraudulent intent.<\/td>Supports the main charge that the will was not genuine and was
fabricated.<\/td><\/tr>Succession and Wills<\/td> Indian Succession Act, 1925<\/a><\/td> Governs the validity, execution, and attestation of wills, and defines
executor\u2019s duties.<\/td>Central to the dispute: authenticity of the will dated 21 March 2025.<\/td><\/tr> Partition and Property Rights<\/td> Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/td> Partition suits allow heirs to claim their rightful share in inherited
property.<\/td>Karisma\u2019s children have filed a partition suit to secure their share in
Sunjay Kapur\u2019s estate.<\/td><\/tr>Interim Relief \/ Injunction<\/td> Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2, CPC<\/td> Allows the court to temporarily restrain a party from transferring or
selling disputed property.<\/td>The children sought interim relief to stop Priya Kapur from creating
third-party rights.<\/td><\/tr>Affidavit & Verification<\/td> Code of Civil Procedure \/ Evidence Act<\/td> Any list or claim must be verified under oath through an affidavit.<\/td> Court directed Priya Kapur to refile the list of assets with her
signature and affidavit.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n