A new layer of legal complexity has emerged in the ongoing inheritance dispute over late industrialist Sanjay Kapoor’s estate worth an estimated Rs 30,000 crore, with senior lawyers questioning the validity of the will submitted by his third wife Priya Kapoor on the grounds of non-compliance with probate requirements and lack of consent of the executor.
Delhi HC probes validity of Sanjay Kapoor’s will on absence of probate and executor action; inside details
During the proceedings on December 10, 2025, the lawyer representing Sanjay Kapoor’s children, Samaira and Kiaan Kapoor, argued before the Delhi High Court that the alleged will suffers from structural and legal weaknesses that go beyond procedural flaws. At the center of the challenge is the conduct of the named executor, Shraddha Suri Marwah, who, according to its provisions in the will, was required to assume custody of the estate’s assets immediately after Kapoor’s death and initiate probate proceedings.
Senior lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani argued that no steps were taken. “Defendant No. 4 has completely disregarded the said will,” he submitted, adding that despite making probate a mandatory requirement in the document, no probate has been sought and no property has been taken under the control of the executor. He argued that clause 3 of the will leaves no discretion on the matter.
The matter was further complicated by the communication dated June 24, 2025 in which Suri had allegedly written to Priya Kapoor asking her to initiate probate proceedings. According to the children’s solicitor, this correspondence clearly acknowledges that the legal responsibility to take probate lies with the executor himself. He says this contradiction undermines the credibility of the document and raises questions about whether the will was intended to act as claimed.
Adding to the challenge is Suri’s earlier statement that he had no prior knowledge of being appointed executor until he allegedly received an email from Dinesh Aggarwal, a witness to the alleged will. Jethmalani argued that under settled law, an executor cannot be appointed without consent or at least prior consultation, describing the lack of such consent in the execution and presentation of a will as a “serious red flag”.
Legal experts echoed these concerns. Bombay High Court lawyer Rahul R. Shelke said the discrepancies strike at the heart of enforceability. He said, “If the will mandates probate and transfer of custody and the executor ignores both, the court is entitled to question whether the will existed in the manner claimed. You cannot rely on the will selectively – either it is followed completely or its credibility is lost.”
As well as questions over probate, the children’s lawyer also pressed the court to appoint an independent administrator to safeguard Sanjay Kapoor’s overseas assets until the validity of the will can be conclusively determined. Jethmalani warned that without court oversight, foreign assets could be sold, refinanced or otherwise disposed of, potentially dragging the parties into multiple overseas legal battles.
“A receiver or an administrator should be appointed for Sanjay’s estate. If this will is used overseas, we may be forced to sue in multiple jurisdictions,” he told the court.
Sanjay Kapoor’s international portfolio reportedly includes residential properties in New York and the United Kingdom, as well as overseas investments linked to Aureus Investments Pvt. Ltd. According to the children’s side, the ownership claim over these properties depends on the currently disputed will.
Senior advocate Pratik Thadani said the ambiguity becomes particularly risky when foreign assets are involved. He said, “When a will is under challenge and the executor’s obligations have not been fulfilled, it is neither wise nor equitable to leave control to a single beneficiary. The appointment of an independent administrator is not about choosing sides, but about protecting the assets until the court reaches a final decision.”
As stated before the court, the concern is that once transactions based on an unverified will take place abroad, they may be difficult or impossible to reverse, even if an Indian court later rejects the document. For Samaira and Kiyan Kapoor, the demand for an administrator has been put forward as a protective measure to preserve the assets and ensure that the final decision is not rendered meaningless by irreversible cross-border actions.
As the Delhi High Court continues to probe the purported will, the controversy now hinges not just on the signatures and witnesses but also on whether the document was ever processed in accordance with the law.
Bollywood News – Live Updates
Follow us for latest Bollywood News, New Bollywood Movies update, Box Office Collection, New Movies Release, Bollywood News Hindi, Entertainment News, Bollywood Live News Today & Upcoming Movies 2025 and stay updated with latest hindi movies only on IHNS.
