The high-profile inheritance battle over auto-components industrialist Sunjay Kapur’s estimated Rs 30,000 crore estate has taken a dramatic turn. What began as a conventional dispute has intensified following the surfacing of alleged call detail records (CDRs) linked to Priya Kapur, potentially contradicting her sworn statements in court.
The Crucial Discrepancy Alleged CDRs, which have rapidly circulated online, indicate that Priya Kapur's mobile phone was located in New Delhi on March 21, 2025. This date is highly significant because Kapur had previously stated in an affidavit before the Delhi High Court that she was physically present in Gurugram on the very same day, during the execution of Sunjay Kapur's contested will. This alleged inconsistency between her affidavit and the digital evidence forms the crux of the latest legal development.
Legal Implications and Expert Opinions Legal experts emphasize that such discrepancies, if authenticated and admitted by the court, could significantly impact the case. Advocate Swapnil Kothari noted, "When an affidavit clashes with electronic evidence, courts become extremely cautious. Even a single inconsistency can lead to a re-examination of the larger narrative." The vast value of the estate further amplifies the scrutiny, as courts are expected to meticulously examine all documents and surrounding circumstances.
Broader Challenges to the Will This new development comes amidst existing objections raised on behalf of Sunjay Kapur’s children, Samaira and Kiaan. Their previous filings have questioned the authenticity of the will itself, citing issues such as: * Spelling errors within the document. * Incorrect pronoun usage for the testator. * Internal inconsistencies that, while seemingly minor in isolation, collectively raise doubts about the will's legitimacy.
Senior Advocate Ashok Paranjpe highlighted the critical importance of precision in testamentary documents, especially those involving substantial assets. "In wills of this magnitude, the paperwork must be spotless," he asserted, underscoring the necessity of credible witness testimony regarding the will's execution.
Understanding Beneficiary Presence Family law expert Mrunalini Deshmukh clarified that the physical presence of a beneficiary at the time a will is executed is not a legal requirement. This observation further fuels questions regarding why Priya Kapur’s affidavit strongly emphasized her presence if it wasn't legally mandatory, thus intensifying the focus on her declared location.
The Road Ahead in Delhi High Court Legal observers, including Advocate Prem Rajani, advise caution against premature conclusions, stressing that high-value inheritance disputes necessitate thorough judicial examination. The Delhi High Court is yet to determine whether the alleged call records will be admitted as evidence and, if so, the weight they will carry. For now, this purported digital trail has added another complex layer, transforming a family inheritance dispute into a closely watched courtroom contest.
