In a dramatic courtroom showdown, Samaira and Kiaan accused their stepmother Priya of forging their late father Sunjay Kapur’s will and usurping the family assets

New Delhi

In a high-drama twist to the ongoing inheritance battle over the estate of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, Karisma Kapoor’s children, Samaira and Kiaan, informed the Delhi High Court that their stepmother, Priya Kapur, was behaving like “Cinderella’s stepmother” by allegedly submitting a forged will to seize control of their father’s assets.

Allegations of forgery and unfair exclusion

During Thursday’s hearing, the siblings — represented by senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani — contended that the will presented by Priya is “bogus” and riddled with “unimaginable errors.” They claimed Priya acted with undue haste after Sunjay’s demise to push through the will and restrict their rightful share, leaving them with just ~26 % while she and her son allegedly gained control of nearly 75 % of the trust and assets.

Jethmalani argued that the will was last modified on March 17 — when, he asserted, Sunjay was not even in the city. The document was stored on a device belonging to one Nitin Sharma, an alleged aide of Priya, who was later made a director of the family’s investment firm, Aureus Investments Pvt Ltd (AIPL)

Further, the counsel claimed no affidavits had been filed by the will’s witnesses — a procedural lapse that deeply undermined its legitimacy. In court, Justice Jyoti Singh opened a sealed envelope containing the asset list, and noted certain documents lacked attestation, signatures, or indexing. She directed Priya to refile them with proper affidavits

The “Cinderella’s stepmother” analogy

Jethmalani employed the metaphor of “Cinderella’s stepmother” to underscore what he claimed was Priya’s deliberate exclusion of the children. He characterized her as someone who, in her purported hurry, sidelined them and appropriated the lion’s share of assets.

“This is no benign stepmother — this is a Cinderella stepmother,” he argued, implying malicious intent and favoritism toward her own child. According to him, Priya was in a “tearing hurry” to assert control over the estate and limit the children’s stake.

He also questioned why Priya insisted on non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and secrecy around asset movements — a tactic he argued was inconsistent with a genuine, transparent will.

Priya’s side and counterclaims

Priya Kapur has maintained that the will is valid and predates Sunjay’s death. Her counsel, which includes senior advocates Rajiv Nayar and Akhil Sibal, has not publicly engaged with all allegations but has denied wrongdoing.

Her side claims the children have already received assets — reportedly around ₹1,900 crore from the trust — and raises the question of what more they want.

In court, Priya also raised the issue of document leaks to the media and requested an inquiry into how confidential papers reached public outlets.

Stakes and context

The dispute centers on an estate estimated at ₹30,000 crore and control over family trusts and corporate interests. Samaira (20) and Kiaan (15) are challenging the exclusion from what they claim are their class-1 heir rights.

In addition to contesting the will, their petition seeks status quo orders restraining Priya from creating third-party rights or further transferring assets.

The Delhi High Court had earlier allowed Priya to file the list of Sunjay’s assets in a sealed cover, a move intended to prevent public disclosure amid the litigation.

What may unfold

When the case resumes on October 13, the defense will respond to the allegations. The court may order forensic examination of the will, digital audits of document creation and modification, and further cross-examination of witnesses.

If the court finds merit in the forgery claims, the will may be struck down and assets redistributed. On the other hand, if Priya’s version holds, she may retain control — though the court has already shown skepticism over procedural lapses.

Given the sheer magnitude of the estate and the public interest nature of the parties involved, this case could set precedents in high-value inheritance litigation in India, especially in blended families with multiple marriage ties.

Source: